Ben Scrape 


opens 


peo fe 
Wess + 


h, + i. @ 
Ranibbooks of 
cology and Antiquities — 
GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


HANDBOOKS OF 
ARCH AZOLOGY AND ANTIQUITIES 


Edited by Professor PERCY GARDNER, Litt.D., of the University 
of Oxford, and Professor FRANCIS W. KELSEY, of the University of 
Michigan. With Illustrations. Ex. crown 8vo. 


Greek Sculpture. By ERNEST A. GARDNER, M.A. New edition 
with Appendix. Part I, Part II. Complete in one volume. 
Appendix separately. 


Greek and Roman Coins. By G. F. HILL, of the Coins Depart- 
ment of the British Museum. 


The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Repunitt: By W. 
WARDE FOWLER, M.A. 


A Handbook of Greek Constitutional History. By A ane 
GREENIDGE, M.A. With Map. 


The Destruction of Ancient Rome. A Sketch of the History of the 
Monuments. By Professor RODOLFO LANCIANI, 


Roman Public Life. By A. H. J. GREENIDGE, M.A, 
Monuments of the Early Church. By W. LowRIE, M.A. 
Grammar of Greek Art. By Professor PERCY GARDNER, 


Life in Ancient Athens. The Social and Public Life of a Classical 
Athenian from Day to Day. By Professor T. G. TUCKER, Litt.D. 


The Monuments of Christian Rome, from Constantine to the 
Renaissance. By ARTHUR L. FROTHINGHAM, Ph.D., Sometime 
Professor of Ancient History at Princeton University. 


THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 


BY 


“ALLAN MARQUAND, Pu.D., L. oe D. 


PROFESSOR OF ART AND ARCHAEOLOGY 
IN PRINCETON UNIVERSITY 


ec Neto Work 
‘THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
3 1909 


All rights reserved 


in «af ce 
a ’ * q 
¢ i 2 
hal 
: 
. 
{ 
°. ‘ 
’ 
ae 
ms 4 
~ 


5 Set up and electrotyped. | Publ 
B ; 
} Ls 
. ; Norbsood 
J.8. Gusts Co. — Berwick 
Norwood, Mass., 


PREFACE 


In publishing this treatise on Greek Architecture I 
wish to acknowledge my obligations to many writers. 
These are all recorded in the List of Abbreviations at the 
end of the volume and in the references given in the 
text. But a more special acknowledgment is due to 
the scholars whose work has appeared in the publications 
of the German Government on Olympia, Pergamon, Priene, 
and Magnesia, and in that of the French Government on 
Delphi, which have furnished much material for both 
text and illustrations. The general treatises of most 
assistance have been those of Boetticher, Durm, and 
Choisy, while the more specialized works of Penrose, 
Haussoullier, Lechat, Krell, Koldewey, Puchstein, Wie- 
gand, and Doerpfeld, as well as many articles published 
in periodicals, have greatly facilitated my task. I am 
also indebted to Professor Harold N. Fowler for a care- 
ful revision of the manuscript, to Dr. Oliver S. Tonks 
for much valuable assistance in reading the proofs and 
preparing the indexes, to Clarence Ward for making the 
illustrations for Chapters I, II, and IV, and to William B. 
Dinsmoor for those of Chapters V and VI. 

ALLAN MARQUAND. 


PRINCETON UNIVERSITY, 
January 15, 1909. 


Vii 


TABLE OF CONTENTS 


CHAPTER I 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 


Wood, clay, concrete and stucco, stone and marble, metal. 
Foundations and pavements. Walls, doorways and win- 
dows. Columns and entablatures, ceilings and roofs. 


CHAPTER II 


ARCHITECTURAL FoRMS 


Foundations. Walls. Antae. Doorsand windows.  Pil- 
Jars, columns and piers. Entablatures. Ceilings and 
roofs. 


CHAPTER III 


PROPORTION . 


Major ratios. Minor ratios.~ Modified ratios. Symmet- 
rical ratios or proportion. 


CHAPTER IV 


DECORATION 


Greek methods of decoration. Types of ornament. Deco- 
ration of foundations, pavements and walls. Doors, win- 
dows, pilasters. Columns. Entablatures. Ceilings and 
roofs. 

ix 


PAGE 


5o 


126 


146 


x TABLE OF CONTENTS 


CHAPTER Vo. 9e ee 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE . ; : Z F i 


Foundations and pavements. Walls. Antae and pilas- 
ters. Doors and windows. Piers and columns. Entabla- 
tures. Ceilings and roof. Style: Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, 
Mixed, and Miscellaneous. ; * 


CHAPTER VI 


MonvuMENTS . ; ‘ } ; ? (mpeg Nr anf 285 


Towns and their defences. Water supply. Religious 
monuments: altars and temples. Governmental buildings: __ 
the bouleuterion and prytaneion. Commercial buildings: 
the agora and stoa. Buildings for physical culture: the 
palaistra, baths, stadion, and hippodrome. Buildings for 
intellectual and social purposes: schools, libraries, clubs, 
theatres, music halls. Buildings for domestic use: the , 
palace and private house. Naval architecture: ships and 
harbors. Sepulchral architecture. eat 


List or ABBREVIATIONS . : Y € ; ar 
List oF ILLUSTRATIONS i “ 4 at. Sig - 7 
Inppx or GREEK Worps . . . - a aac ; 


GENERAL INDEX . ~ : A ‘ " : 3 3 


a 


wes é 


GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


va 
a 
« 


GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


CHAPTER I 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 


THE Greeks in their architecture made use of wood, 
clay, stucco, stone, and sparingly of metal, glass and other 
substances. It is useless to discuss which of these mate- 
rials is to be ranked as the earliest or most fundamental. 
As far back as we can trace their history, the Greeks 
employed all of these materials, and they never altogether 
dispensed with them. But while we may not hope to 
trace the evolution of Greek architectural forms from 
the exclusive employment of any one material, it is neces- 
sary that we should consider what materials the Greeks 
had at their disposal and how they made use of them, 
before we study their architectural forms, decoration and 
the character of their monuments. 

1. Woop. —In regard to a material so perishable as 
wood, little can be expected from actual remains. Yet 
several dowels from the columns of the Parthenon are 
preserved in the Acropolis Museum at Athens; various 
objects made of walnut, oak, box, chestnut, fir and pine 
have survived in charred condition from the _ build- 
ings of Pompeii; and piles from Roman buildings and 


B 1 ‘ 


47) GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


bridges still exist which have derived extraordinary 
strength from their position under water.t More may be 
learned from ancient representations of wooden struc- 
tures, especially from the rock-cut tombs of Etruria? and 
Asia Minor,’ and from vase-paintings. The Etruscan 
tombs preserve for us several types of roofs which can- 
not have differed greatly from contemporary roofs in 
Greece. Asia Minor, especially Phrygia, Lycia and Paph- 
lagonia, is rich in tombs which reveal methods of construc- 
tion closely related to, or derived from, those of the Greeks. 
From the remains of buildings in Greece proper, much 
may be inferred concerning the use of wooden columns, 
wooden entablatures and roofs. But more extended and 
detailed information is to be sought in classic literature 
and inscriptions. Vitruvius, in his De Architectura, re- 
flects the technical knowledge of Greek architectural writ- 
ers in what he has to say in regard to the use of wood as 
building material. Theophrastos, in his History of Plants,* 
describes the different kinds of trees and throws out many 
hints concerning their specific uses in architecture. . Pliny, 
in his Historia Naturalis, reflects the knowledge possessed 
by Theophrastos and other Greek writers. Among 
modern writings, H. Blimner’s Technologie und Termino- 
logie der Gewerbe und Kiinste bet Griechen und Rémer 
deserves especial mention for its admirable treatment of 
the ancient technical methods, while A. Choisy, in his 
Etudes épigraphiques sur Varchitecture grecque, has com- 
mented with technical acumen on Greek inscriptions re- 
lating to the Arsenal at the Peiraieus, the Wall of pes 
and the Erechtheion. 


1Keller, Mitt. ant. Gesellsch. zu Ziirich, XII, 308. 2 Martha, Ch. VII. 
8 Perrot et Chipiez, V, 361-384. 4 rept put dv ioropia, in ten books. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 3 


The Greeks used a variety of woods for architectural 
purposes. They recognized that woods differed in hard- 
ness, in durability, in resistance to pressure or flexure, and 
that they acted in different ways when exposed to mois- 
ture or dryness. ‘They knew that even the same wood 
varied in value according to its age, or the season of the 
year when it was cut, or the region from which it came. 
They not only made broad distinctions, as between wood 
suitable for houses and wood suitable for ships, but they 
applied with nice discrimination the different woods for 
specific purposes. Theophrastos! mentions as specially 
adapted for building purposes, pine, fir, cedar, cypress, 
oak and juniper. Of these, the pine and fir were 
highly valued as supports, whether vertical or horizontal; 
cedar and cypress were prized for roofs and floors of 
houses and for ships; the oak, several varieties of which 
were known, was used for thresholds, door-posts, keels of 
ships and other purposes; and the juniper, on account of 
its durability, was employed with equal satisfaction above 
or below ground. Many other woods were employed 
by the Greek architects. Thus from the acacia were 
made roofing beams of great length; rafters made from 
the date-palm were supposed all over the Greek world 
to warp in a direction directly opposed to the pressure 
laid upon them. ‘The alder was found to be serviceable 
for foundation piles, water-pipes, ships and bridges; the 
wild fig, for curved objects, such as the ribs of boats. 
Ash, chestnut, black or white poplar, elm and walnut 
were also used for architectural purposes, as also, in lesser 
degree, olive, box and ebony. 

Various implements were employed for wood construc- 


1 Theophrastos, V, 7, 4. 


4 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


tion. The primitive architect who constructed a log cabin 
required but few tools. A knife or axe sufficed for his 
purpose. But more complicated constructions demanded 
a greater variety of implements. The Greek carpenter’s 
outfit did not differ greatly from that of to-day. He had 
his knives and chisels, his axe, which might be single or 
double, and his curved adze (Fig. 1). He had his single 
and double ham- 
mer, his pick 
hammer and _ his 
hammer for ex- 
tracting nails. 
His saw existed 
in several varie-— 
ties, and was 
differently made 
according to its 
use by one or 
more persons. He 
had various gim- 
lets and augers, 
and the  time- 

Fic. 1. Curved adze. honored drill, to 
be used with a bow. He used a plane and the file, com-. 
passes of various kinds, a linear measure, a levelling 
implement, a square and angle measure. He marked 
his straight lines with a stretched string, smeared with 
red or white chalk, and he gauged his perpendiculars by 
means of a plumb-line, to which was attached a leaden 
weight cast in attractive form. Such implements may 
not have been adapted for rapid workmanship, but they 
answered every ordinary demand. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 5 


The methods of construction were not always the same. 
With the implements mentioned above, wood for building 
purposes was either pared of its bark, so as to form rounded 
logs,! or hewn into squared blocks or beams, or split or 
sawed into planks. ‘These elements were combined in 
various ways so as to form fixed structures. In the case 
of very heavy logs or beams, gravity sometimes sufficed to 
hold them in place. But ordinarily some device was re- 
quired to bind the separate parts together. We may dis- 
tinguish five different methods: (1) splicing, (2) nailing, 
(3) clamping, (4) notching, (5) gluing. Splicing, by 
means of withes or cords, had perhaps a limited applica- 
tion. But it was undoubtedly employed for combining 
slender materials into stronger units. The torus mould- 
ing of the Egyptian cornice was almost invariably painted 
with a winding band; the annuli of the Doric capital seem 
to represent the cord or ring which held together reeds 
which formed the original columns; and to this day in 
Greece and Italy scaffoldings are usually constructed of 
rounded timbers held together by cords. 

Nailing was accomplished either with wooden pegs, or 

nails of metal, which might be of iron, bronze or even 
silver. ‘These pegs and nails were of various forms and 
sizes, and were applied sometimes directly and sometimes 
through a reglet, which separated as well as united the 
members to which it was applied. 

Clamping, by means of wooden or metal clamps (dduaTa, 
BrATpa), was a method of bonding applied to wooden as 
wellas stone construction. Dove-tailed clamps, resembling 
a double axe and called, therefore, veXexivor, were often 
employed. 


1 Bliimner, IT, 300. 


6 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Notching, as a means of bonding, is peculiarly adapted 
to wooden construction, and must age been employed 
from earliest times. ‘The primitive sanctuary of Poseidon 
Hippios,! near Mantineia, built by Agamedes and Tro- 
phonios, was made of oak logs, “fashioned and fitted 
together,” doubtless by notching. Notched timber con- 
struction was imitated in many of the marble tombs of 
Lycia. It was naturally common in the construction of 
roofs, where the rafters were scarfed and abutted against 


notches in the wall plates. Beams uniting to form a right 


angle were either mitred together or fastened by a tenon 
(wepirouis) and mortise (yeA@uor). 

Gluing, as a means of bonding wood, was known to 
Greek carpenters in Homeric times, and experience soon 
taught them which woods were, and which were not, 
adapted to receive this treatment. When great adhesive 
strength was required, a glue made from the hides and 
hoofs of cattle (ravpcxodXa) was used. ; 

The principles of framing once understood, the applies 
tions were many. Houses, temples, and other buildings, 


especially in early times, were often constructed entirely 


of wood.. Even when built of brick or stone, wood was 

still required for portions of the buildings. In the build- 

ing of houses, the foundations, walls, floors, roofs, columns, 

entablatures, doors, windows and decorative mouldings 

might be of wood. Ships called for even more complicated 
carpentry. : 

The foundations of wooden houses on dry soil were 
usually of stone ; on damp soil they consisted of piles. For 
this purpose the elder, elm and oak are recommended by 
Vitruvius.? 


1 Paus; VIII, 10, 2. 2 Vitruvius, II, 9, 10-11. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 7 


Floors (ckatw opodai ) consisted of a system of girders 
(Soxoi, duepetouata), which supported the joists (o¢nkicxor, 
émi8rnTot), on which were laid the boards (cavides, rivaxes ). 
The girders were usually set into niches in the walls, but 
sometimes rested on 
independent sup- 
ports(Vig. 2). The 
boards weresecurely 
put together and 
fastened, probably 
by grooving, and were then covered with clay or tiles. 

Walls, when made of wood, were constructed with corner 
posts (oTa@yo/) and intervening studs (écpiwtipes) without 
braces, mortised into the lower sills, and held together at 
the top by a wall plate. An exterior covering of boards 
may sometimes have been given, but it was an early and 
general practice to fill up the spaces between the uprights 
with rubble, after the fashion of the European half-timbered 
house. ‘This seems to be the construction indicated in 
Lycian tombs. An interesting survival of this type of 
construction may be found in Roman and Byzantine walls 


LE 
Y ffs sass LY —— . 


WU, / 


Fig. 2.—Floor of Arsenal at — 


of Algeria! and Tunis, where the wooden uprights are 


replaced by stone (Fig. 3). 

Doors were usually made of wood. Their sills (v7ro- 
Tovata, ovooi), jambs (ora@puor ), lintels (iweptévaca, vrrép- 
@vpa) and hinge posts (atpdéduyyes), when of wood, were 
made of carefully selected materials. The doors of the 
Temple of Artemis at Ephesos were made of materials 
which had “lain treasured up” for four generations, accord- 
ing to Theophrastos,? and lasted for four hundred years, 
according to the tradition preserved by Pliny.? Door 


1 Gsell. II, 30. 2 Theophrastos, V, 4, 2. Pliny, XVI, 79, 1. 


8 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


frames of wood were used not only in the ancient buildings 
at ‘Troy and Tiryns, but also were employed even in such 
: perfect marble struc- 
tures as the Parthenon 
and the Propylaea. 
Columns and _ their 
U7). entablatiees were often 
of wood. From the 
ruined palaces at Troy 


_ bases which once bore 
the wooden columnsstill 
survive. At Olympia, 
SETS TEE ey a8 late as the time of 
Fic, 3. — Wall of a building at Bir Sgaoun, Pausanias, there re- 

Algeria. mained one of the old 
oak columns of the Heraion and others from the house 
of Oinomaos. The columns of the Temple of Hera 
at Metapontum and the stairway in the Temple of 
Artemis at Ephesos were made of grape wood.! It is not 
strange that the wooden entablatures, which must have 
crowned many a Greek as well as Etruscan and Asiatic 
colonnade, have now disappeared, although their forms — 


and Tiryns, the stone — 


have been preserved in stone and marble. In the 


Arsenal at Peiraieus the wooden epistyle (éavaTvAov Evrt- 
voy) consisted of a series of single blocks, extending from 
pier to pier and fastened together probably by clamps. 
Frequently, however, the epistyles were made of two or 
three beams set side by side, trabes compactiles, as directed 
by Vitruvius,? with air spaces between them for their 
preservation; or of epistyles superposed once or twice, 


1 Pliny, XIV, 2. 2 Vitruvius, IV, 7, 4. 


a at ee 
oe ee 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 9 


each upper series projecting slightly beyond the series 
immediately below it. This method of construction was 
peculiar to countries where massive wood was scarce. It 


Fic. 4.— Restoration of Proto-Doric Entablature. 


was especially current in Persia and Ionian Greece. 
Above the epistyle the fixed forms of the Doric and 
Ionic entablature preserved many reminiscences of wooden: 
construction. The mutules and reglets in stone and mar- 
ble buildings cannot be satisfactorily explained except as 
survivals of wooden members which once served a useful 
purpose. In wooden buildings we may believe that they 
were employed as bonding members. Thus, the mutules 
united and kept from warping the boards of the roof, and 
the reglets performed a similar service for the boards 


10 . GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


above the epistyle (Fig. 4). Triglyphs and dentils are 
also most satisfactorily explained as representing the ends 
of horizontal ceiling beams. Sufficient proof of this is 
furnished by the tombs of Lycia (Fig. 5). The fact that 
in the later Greek buildings triglyphs and dentils did not 
correspond in position or number to the actual ceiling 
beams, is of little significance. © 


\eeCU EME 
Sree PH ages 


Fia. 5. — Sarcophagus from Gjolbaschi-Trysa. 


The construction of roofs varied in character. Compli- 
cated, interpenetrating roofs were always avoided and 
the simpler forms of roofs adopted. The pyramidal roof 
of the log huts of the inhabitants of Colchis,t made by a 


1 Vitruvius, II, 1, 4. 


fo. ee. aa yy ‘is oe 


—— =" 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 11 


gradual contraction of the crossing timbers of the walls, 
required little aid from carpentry. Slght notches near the 
angles were sufficient to hold the logs together. The hori- 
zontal and pent roof differed but little in construction from 
ordinary floors, but the gable or saddle roof demanded new 
methods of construction. ‘This consisted of a ridge-beam 
(xopudaiov) and the rafters (odnxioxa). These were 
bonded together by means of purlins (iwavtes), which 
carried the battens or sheathing (xadAvppata). Such a 
roof as this sufficed for covering small spaces, when the 
ridge-pole might extend from gable to gable. But it 
could not be applied to long spaces, like the central nave 
of a temple or basilica. Even if ridge-pieces of sufficient 
length could be found or put together they must needs 
be of extraordinary thickness to carry the great weight of 
a long roof. Supports were accordingly given to the 
ridge-beam at definite intervals. These consisted some- 
times of a single row of columns or piers, more frequently 
of a double row of columns. The double colonnade 
carried cross-beams (wecouvat), and upon each of these 
rested a block or king-post (v7ré@nua), the sole function 
of which seems to have been to support the ridge-beam 
(Fig. 6). 

The-cross-beams in Philon’s Arsenal at the Peiraieus, 
of the fourth century, were quite as heavy as those we find 
represented in Phrygian and Etruscan tombs, and the 
raking rafters seem to have been of corresponding heavi- 
ness. ‘The cross-beams resisted the weight of the roof by 
their massiveness and indisposition to flexure. Between 
this method of roofing and the system of employing a 
series of trussed frames with their ties and braces there 
is little difference in outward appearance, except that the 


\ 


Bae se GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Greek frames were more massive; but there is a wide dif- 
ference in principle. Trussed frames were possibly known 
to the Greeks,! but they can hardly have come into general 
use except with the steeper sloping roofs of the Romans. 

Horizontal ceilings were common in Greek buildings, 
but were sometimes omitted, as in some of the Sicilian 
temples and possibly in a portion of the Erechtheion.? 
Wooden ceilings (EvAwpodar) exhibited a series of power- 


EE yy et 


Fic. 6. — Roof construction of Arsenal at Peiraieus. 


ful beams, upon which smaller cross-beams were laid so 
as to form square coffered openings. Upon these were 
built smaller coffers, closed by square panels. At the 
Temple of Artemis at Ephesos, the ceiling beams were of 
cedar® and the cofferings of cypress. Coffered wooden 
ceilings may be presumed for the interiors of most Greek 
temples. | 

2. CLAY, CONCRETE AND Strucco.—The ancient 
Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Persians and Phoeni- 
cians made use of sun-dried brick for building purposes. 
It is only in recent years that historians of archi- 
tecture have realized the extensive use made of this 


1 Choisy, Etudes, 155. Pliny, Vie 
2 Tbid. 147. 4 Vitruvius, II, 9, 18. 


~~ pe «= 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 138 


material by the Greeks. In the Mycenaean period it was 
almost universally employed for the walls of palaces and 
private houses. The excavations at Argos! and at 
Olympia? show that the walls of the Temple of Hera in 
both places were of sun-dried brick. Later structures, 
such as the walls of Athens and of Mantineia, the palaces 
of Croesus at Sardes, of Mausolos at Halikarnassos, of the 
Attalids at Tralles? and the Palaestra at Olympia, were 
of the same material. Sun-dried brick was preferred in 
the late period to stone for fortification walls, on account 
of its capacity for resisting the blows of the battering- 
ram,* but it offered a feeble resistance to water, as was 
proved by the fall of Mantineia. In their selection and 
preparation of clay the Greeks took great care. Vitruvius® 
lays down principles as to which clays should be selected 
and which avoided in making bricks. <A long experience in 
brick building need not be assumed before one learns that 
the sandy soils are unfitted, and the more compact, calcare- 
ous soils better adapted, for brickmaking. The crude or 
sun-dried brick (7A iOos or mAivO0s mun) was made of clay 


' mixed with straw, was moulded in frames, and exposed for 


along time to the sun. The inhabitants of Utica are said to 
have exposed bricks to the sun for five years before using 
them for building purposes. Vitruvius recommends two 
years as sufficient. In Egypt, under a more uniform and 
powerful heat from the sun, the time was still further 
reduced. 

The sizes of bricks differed under different circum- 
stances. Vitruvius® mentions three sizes for Greek bricks: 


1 Waldstein, I, 111. 4 Paus., VIII, 8, 7-8. 
2 Olympia, II, 31. 5 Vitruvius, IT, 3, 1. 
3 Vitruvius, II, 8, 9-10. 6 Tbid., I, 3, 3. 


14 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the Lydian, which corresponded to the Roman later ses- 
quipedalis, or brick, a foot and a half in length; the 
mevtddwpos, five palms in length, used in public; the 
- tetpadwpos, four palms long, used in private buildings. 
In earlier days the bricks differed materially in size from 
those classified by Vitruvius. ) 

In laying crude bricks of uniform sizes, it followed as a 
mechanical consequence that they should be laid in regu- 
lar courses (orotyot, é7tBorat), and that their vertical 
joints (appol amevres) should not be directly superposed, 
otherwise the walls would tend to separate along the line 


of the joints. When of greater thickness than that of a 


single brick, the bricks were laid @oppyndov Kal cata piKos, 
by ‘stretchers and headers,” some of the bricks stretching 
in the direction of the length of the wall, others heading 


at right angles to the face and penetrating into the body 


of the wall. There are many possible variations in the 
arrangement of courses of bricks with reference to headers 
and stretchers. A wall may consist of bricks laid all as 
headers or all as stretchers, or partly of headers and partly 
of stretchers. In the latter case the headers may occur 


at more or less regular intervals in the same course with — 


the stretchers, or they may be arranged all in the same 
courses and at more or less regular intervals above the 
stretchers. In modern brickwork it is customary in 
England and the United States to lay a course of headers 
above every five or six or even ten courses of stretchers. 
What the practice of the Greeks was in this regard, 
and how it varied, is not a matter of general knowledge. 
In Etruscan stonework, which may have reflected the 
methods of early Greek bricklaying, the headers and 
stretchers were arranged in alternate courses. The same 


also in the second 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 15 


alternation seems to be implied in the term évadda€, used 
concerning the courses of headers and stretchers in the 
walls of the Arsenal at the Peiraieus.1 The device of 


laying courses of headers at regular intervals was in effect 


a method of bonding the face to the body of a wall. A 
wall thus constructed could not warp or split into a series 
of vertical slices. But the device, effective enough for 
comparatively thin walls, was less efficient in bonding 
walls of considerable thickness. In such cases the Greeks 
adopted a very ancient practice of substituting large bond- 
ing members of wood for the smaller ones of clay. Pali- 
sades, built by primitive peoples, of logs laid crosswise, 
withthe intervening spaces filled in with sand or clay or rub- 
ble, preceded walls built of sun-dried brick. The Egyptians,” 
and probably also the Babylonians and Assyrians,® laid 
beams of wood both 
longitudinally and 
transversely in the 
core of their brick 
walls. We find 
this construction 


prehistoric settle- — 
ment at. Troy, 
about 2200 B.c. 
(Hig. 1). Fic. 7.— Brick wall bonded with wood. 

In later days the 
same method of bonding walls of sun-dried brick was 
employed.. In the specifications for the walls of Athens,* 


1 Choisy, Ltudes, 6. ® Choisy, I, 87. 
2 Perrot et Chipiez, I, 501. 4Choisy, Htudes, 51. 


16 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


we read of the insertion of longitudinal beams (@pdavor) 


and of transverse beams (évéeryor). Philon of Byzantium! — 


praises this method of bonding walls of fortresses, and 
Vitruvius? advises the laying transversely of olive beams 
into walls and foundations as frequently as possible, on the 
eround that they pin together the outer and inner faces of 
the walls and thus increase their durability. Similar 
building methods prevail in Greece down to the present 
day. Sometimes mere laths are sunken into the face of 
a wall and the actual bonding beams omitted. This is 
a decorative survival of abandoned structural methods. 
.It seems strange to us that the Greeks made little or no 
use of baked brick for the walls of buildings. Pausanias, 
in his detailed descriptions of what he saw in Greece, 


twice mentions buildings of burnt brick (wAiw@os orTn). 
One of these buildings was a temple within the sanctuary 


of the Mysian Demeter,? on the way from Mycenae to 


Argos, the other, the Philippeion at Olympia. The sanc- 


tuary of the Mysian Demeter has not been identified and 
the Philippeion has been shown to have been made of poros 
and marble. It is a noteworthy circumstance, however, 


that the poros walls of the Philippeion were covered with . 


stucco and painted in imitation of brick construction.® 
We might be inclined to consider this imitation of brick- 
work to be a Roman decoration added several centuries 
after the building was constructed, were it not that a still 
earlier imitation of brickwork may be found again in 
Olympia. ‘This forms part of the decorations of the sima 
of the sixth century Treasury of Gela.® The painted 


1 De re fortificat., II, 3; De Rochas, 36. 4 Tbid., V, 20, 10. 
2 Vitruvius, I, 5, 3. 5 Olympia, II, 181-182. 
8 Paus., II, 18, 3. 6 Ibid., I, 198. 


£ 


I aa 0 te wee Oo 


~ 
3 


on es ae ee 


] 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION i 


decoration here suggests two courses of brick above the 
rest of the wall. At this position, baked brick would be 
useful as a protection from the waters of the roof and is 
specifically recommended by Vitruvius.! It is thus possi- 
ble that walls of baked bricks were used, though sparingly, 
by the Greeks. 

The superiority of baked to sun-dried brick for such 
portions of buildings as were especially exposed to mois- 
ture was thoroughly appreciated by the Greeks. They 
employed terra-cotta tiles («épapyos) of various shapes and 
sizes for water conduits and drains, for pavements and 
roof covering, and they moulded into ornamental forms 
terra-cotta revetments for cornices, including the simae, 
antefixes and acroteria. Considerable experimentation 
was no doubt necessary before the conditions of baking 


clay were fully understood, and yet we are amazed at the 


intelligence displayed by the Greeks in their earlest 
efforts in the manufacture of architectural terra-cottas. 


‘The huge acroterion that crowned the gable of the Heraion 


at Olympia has a hole in the middle, apparently to allow 
the great disk to contract in the baking. It is cradled on 
the back,? evidently to prevent warping. ‘The mouldings 
with which it is decorated are made of a finer clay applied 
before the baking. It was soon learned that the more 
compact clays were subject to crack in the baking, hence 
rougher clays, which were more porous and elastic, were 
used as a-background. On the fine slip applied to the 
exterior the ornamentation was incised and painted. In 
the case of roofing and drain tiles this exterior coating 
was almost a vitreous glaze. 

The problem of constructing with tiles was solved in 


1 Vitruvius, IT, 8, 18. : 2 Olympia, II, 191. 
c 


18 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


various ways. Sometimes all bonding deviees were avoided 


and the tiles laid upon’each other with dry joints. When | 


the walls or covers of drains were thus constructed the 
superincumbent mass of earth was utilized to bond the 
tiles together. When tiles were applied to a sloping roof 
_g some device was 
" necessary to pre- 
vent the mass of 
tiles from sliding. 
This was accom- 


Fic. 8. — Roofing tiles hooked together. 


the tiles together. 
The joints were not cemented, consequently there was 
considerable elasticity in a Greek roof (Fig. 8). Occasion- 
ally tiles were bonded together by means of a very hard 
lime mortar. ‘This is the case in the brick portion of the 
oldest water conduit in Olympia, the one which brought 
water for the use of the priests of the Heraion.1 We 


cannot therefore explain the absence of buildings of baked 


brick amongst the Greeks by their ignorance of lime 
mortar. They may have distrusted the oven as a means 
of thoroughly and uniformly hardening bricks of clay, a 
distrust shared even by Vitruvius, or may have preferred 


the time-honored method of building without mortar. | 


Had they felt the necessity for it, it was certainly within 
their power to erect buildings of baked bricks bonded by 
the very best of lime mortar. 

In bonding the terra-cotta revetments to wood or stone, 
nails of copper, bronze and iron were employed. Clamps 
of lead were also used. ‘Terra-cotta revetments, as eco- 
nomical and useful substitutes for stone and marble, are 


1 Olympia, I, 174. 


plished by hooking — 


Ss 


>... 


re 


a 


xB 
. 
7 
bx 
i ; 
E 
q 
- 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 19 


not confined to Etruscan and Roman buildings. Friezes, 
cornices, antefixes and acroteria of this material are found 
in Greek buildings in southern Italy and Sicily, at Olym- 
pia, Delos and Athens.! 

Concrete was used for pavements, floors and roofs, and 
the finer stucco for covering walls, columns, ceilings and 
for ornamental mouldings. Pavements (otp@pata, édd¢n) 
of fine cement laid upon a coarse concrete have been 
found in various Mycenaean palaces, a noteworthy ex- 
ample being that in the courtyard and in the large megaron 
at Tiryns.” One of the earliest of the water conduits at 
Olympia, dating from the seventh century B.c., and lead- 
ing to the Altar of the Nymphs, was made of a hard cement 
composed of lime and small pebbles. The pavements of 
the Temple of Zeus at Olympia and of many other temples 
were similarly constructed. Vitruvius? lays down the 
rules for pavements of this kind. ‘They consisted of a 
fundamental rudus, of coarse stones and lime, a central 
nucleus of broken potsherds and lime, upon which was 
laid the exactum pavimentum. With slight variations, the 
same methods had been employed by the Greeks during 
the whole course of their history. When pavements of 
concrete were laid upon the wooden floors of a building, 
precautions were taken to spread first upon the wooden 
planks a layer of straw, so that the lime might not injure 
the wooden frame. When such floors were exposed to 
the open, and had to withstand dampness and heat and 
frost, special expedients were necessary to prevent the 
cracking of the cement through the expansion or contrac- 


1 Borrmann, Architektonische Terracotten, in Olympia, I, 187-203 ; Die 
Keramik in der Baukunst, 28-51; Frazer, Paus., I, 59. 
2 Schliemann, Tiryns, 203, 214, 224. 8 Vitruvius, VII, 1. 


20) GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


tion of its wooden support. In such cases, Vitruvius 
recommends a second sheathing of planks at right angles 
to the first; a statwmen, or foundation, composed of stones 
as large as a man’s fist, and clay; a nucleus not less than a 
foot thick; and, if necessary, a double tile covering, which 
should have a slight incline. An interesting variety of 
concrete pavement is that described by Vitruvius! as used 
by the Greeks for winter dining rooms. It was composed 
of ashes mixed with lime and sand. It was not cold to 
the feet, and water spilled upon it readily evaporated. 
Stucco (kovia, coviaua, opus albarium), made of marble 
dust or gypsum, when applied to wet plaster made a sur- 
face more durable than that of marble itself. It was used 


as a covering to protect sun-dried brick and the coarse 


stones, sometimes applied to baked brick and even to 
marble. The walls of the ancient palaces at Tiryns, 
Mycenae and Knossos were plastered and covered with a 
fine stucco, fragments of which still retain their polychro- 
matic decoration. ‘The poros columns and entablatures of 
archaic buildings in Greece, Italy and southern Italy re- 
ceived, as did the sandstone columns of Egypt, a covering 
of fine stucco. Stucco was sometimes applied, as in the 
Treasury of the Megarians at Olympia,? to the surfaces of 


blocks of stone so that they might be more closely fitted 


together. Stucco ornaments, though in reality a cheap 


substitute for carved wood or stone, came in the classic 


period to be considered as signs of extravagance. After 
the days of Alkibiades, however, this luxury and that of 
having wall paintings on stuccoed walls was widely spread. 
Vitruvius, in giving directions for constructing cornices 
and vaults of stucco, is concerned that they should be 


1 Vitruvius, VII, 4, 5. 2 Olympia, I, 53. 8 Vitruvius, VII. 3. 


ae ee ee ee ee 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 21 


made without much overhang and as light as possible. 
The walls were also a source of anxiety. Various pre- 
cautions were taken to secure dry walls, and on these, after 
the first coarse plastering, no less than three coats of fine 
sand mortar and three of stucco were recommended. 

3. STONE AND MARBLE. Greece was well provided 
with stone and marble, admirably adapted for building 
purposes. It was inevitable, with the advance of civiliza- 
tion, that a more substantial material should be substi- 
tuted for wood and clay. The substitution of stone for 
wood is admirably illustrated by the Heraion at Olympia. 
This temple, dating from the eighth or ninth century, B.c., 
was built, hke Mycenaean palaces, with walls of sun-dried 
brick, and columns and entablature of wood. The old 
oaken columns were here gradually replaced by stone 
columns whose capitals show a succession of archaic, de- 
veloped and decadent forms, until in the day of Pausanias 
only one of the oaken columns remained. In the Greek 
towns of southern Italy, wooden entablatures upon stone 
columns were in use for centuries ; but inevitably Greek 
logic demanded entablatures and walls, as well as columns, 
of stone. Not merely the demand for more enduring 
temples and civic buildings, but also for more substantial 
roads and bridges, aqueducts and tombs, led to a rapid 
development of the art of the stone-cutter and mason. 

The most common building stone was called poros 
(m@pos or AMos mapivos). Both ancient and modern 
writers use the term with great laxity.! In this connec- 
tion, H. S. Washington, the geologist, says :? ‘“ There is 
great lack of definiteness in the use of the word poros, 
which is made to include almost all soft, light colored 


1 Frazer, Paus., III, 502-503. 2 A.J.A. 1891, 395, note 1. 


a GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


stones, not palpably marble or hard limestone. In the 
majority of cases, it is a sort of travertine, again a shell 
conglomerate, and occasionally a sandstone or some de- 
composed rock containing serpentine or other hydrated 
mineral.” When such breadth of significance is allowed, 
it is not surprising that so-called poros should vary greatly 
in character. At Syracuse, the columns of the temple 
have weathered very badly, while those at Corinth, gina 


and Assos still retain much of their original form. Poros — 
figured prominently in the chief buildings of Greece and ~ 


her colonies from the eighth to the middle of the fifth 
century, and in some cases even later. It was ren- 
dered practically weather-proof by a covering of fine, hard 
stucco. 


White marble (A/@os AevKcs) was used sparingly in 


the sixth century and abundantly in and after the 
fifth century. Being more compact and durable than 
poros, it seems to have been first employed for decorative 
sculpture on such portions of buildings as were especially 
exposed to the weather. Thus, at the Old Temple 
of Athena on the Acropolis at Athens, some of the 
metopes, the cornice, the gable sculptures and presumably 


the tiles, were of marble, the remainder of the building 
being constructed of Peiraieus stone and local lime-— 


stone.! 

The island quarries seem to have been opened first. 
Byzes of Naxos in the sixth century, B.Cc., has the 
credit of having first made roofing tiles of marble.? 
Parian marble was imported at Athens for architectural 
purposes at least a century before her own local marbles 
were discovered. Anaphe, Tenos and Andros also fur- 


1 Wiegand, 59-60. 2 Paus., V, 10, 3. 


| 
. 
P 
a 
» 
J 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION ahs) 


nished white marble. From Thasos came the marble used 
in the buildings at Samothrace. At various points in the 
Peloponnesos, white marble was found. Special mention 
may be made of the quarries at Doliana near Tegea. In 
the immediate vicinity of Athens, Mt. Hymettos furnished 
a coarse blue-streaked marble and Mt. Pentelikon the fine 
grained white marble, the surface of which in time 
acquires a golden sheen, due, it is said, to the fine grains 
of iron which this marble contains. Of Pentelic marble 
were built the principal Athenian buildings of the age of 
Pericles and succeeding centuries; it was imported by 
Augustus and Domitian into Rome. From Laurion 
came the marble used in the temple at Sounion. Boeotia 
had a marble which became white with exposure, used at 
Orchomenos and at Lebadeia, and Laconia had several 
quarries of white marble. In western Asia Minor, there 
were also deposits of white marble at Ephesos, Herakleia 
and Mylasa, and in Italy at the well-known quarries of 
Carrara. 

Dark, more or less uniformly colored, marbles were 
found at Eleusis, in Arcadia, Laconia, Lesbos, Melos and 
Chios and at Alabanda and Miletos. 

Variegated, polychromatic marbles, though used more 
abundantly by the Romans, were employed by the Greeks 
as early as the fourth century in the palace of Mausolos 
at Halikarnassos and more freely in the Hellenistic period, 
especially at Alexandria. Attica and Laconia had poly- 
chromatic marbles, but the better-known varieties were 
the green -cipollino from Karystos, in Euboea (Aé@os 
Evfoixds); the variegated marble from Chios (A/@os Xéos) 
of which the people of that island built their city walls; 
the purple and white pavonizetto from Phrygia (A@os 


94 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


@Ppvyios); and the yellow giallo antico, from Numidia 
(AWos ArBu«ds). Besides these, Rhodes, Skyros, Lydia, 
Caria, Keltis (France), and Italy possessed polychromatic 
marbles.1 

The Greek quarry, whether subterranean or not, differed 
little from the quarries of Egypt. When subterranean 
and large, various devices, such as piers and curved ceil- 
ings, were employed to prevent the superincumbent mass 


from falling in. Directions for quarrying were given by ~ 


Heron of Alexandria.? Like the Egyptians, the Greeks 
made deep cuttings and inserted wedges. The wedges 
were probably of wood; their simultaneous expansion, 


when wet, making the rift in the rock. In the quarries at 


Selinous and Syracuse may be seen evidence of the cross 
cuttings for quadrated blocks and the broader, circular 
cutting for the drums of columns. 

There were many implements used by the stone-cutter 
in common with the carpenter, but he had also implements 
peculiarly his own. His hammer and his chisels had to be 


adapted for heavier work. He had his pick or pointer, 


his smooth-edged chisel, and his toothed chisels, some 
adapted for rough work and others for finer work ; also a 


graving tool. For deep cutting he required a drill, and 


for the final polish he used the file and Egyptian sand or 
Naxian corundum. In fine jointing it was necessary 
that the surfaces of the joints should be as nearly as possi- 
ble absolutely plane surfaces. A washing with nitre and 
water (€xvitpwots) made the surfaces absolutely clean. 


1 For a study of marbles the reader may be referred to: Lepsius, 


Griechische Marmorstudien, Abh. k. p. Akad. Wiss., Berlin, 1890; 
Blimner, III, 26-57; Middleton, Remains of Ancient Rome, I, 14-22. 
2MynxavKal icoywyal. 


4... Te aT 
. Fr 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 25 


The transportation of stone blocks from the quarry to 
the building was not always aneasy matter. Wagons and 
sledges sufficed for smaller blocks, but special devices are 
said to have been invented by Chersiphron for rolling 
columns and by Metagenes for revolving epistyles to the 
Temple of Artemis at Ephesos. Similar devices are 
thought by Koldewey to have been used at Selinous. 
Columns, or drums of columns, were dragged like a modern 
roller, being held to a frame by means of small cylinders, 
which served as axles. In transporting epistyles the 
framework was provided with wheels.! To elevate the 
largest blocks to their places, inclined planes were 
employed by Metagenes at Ephesos ; but ordinarily, cranes 
and derricks sufficed. The derricks consisted of one or 
more beams set on end and provided with ropes, pulleys 
and a windlass. <A derrick with two beams and one with 
four beams were used during the second century restora- 
tions of the Temple of Apollo near Miletos. The derricks 
were stayed by means of ropes and carried pulleys. The 
pulleys contained usually three wheels, but not infrequently 
five or more. Windlasses of various forms were used, of 
which one of the most interesting, figured on a relief 
from Capua,? is in the form of a treadmill. 

Various devices were employed in preparing the blocks, 
so that they could be easily lifted by means of the derricks. 
Sometimes projecting tenons were left (@Ta, ayxa@ves), so 
that the blocks could be easily caught by a sling (Fig. 9). 
Sometimes, as at Akragas, grooves were cut on the outside 
of the blocks into which the lifting ropes might be fitted ; * 
sometimes a channel was cut into the heart of the block, 


1 Bliimner, III, 129, 131. 2 Tbid., III, 126. 
3 Durm, 80, No. 2. 


26 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


as in the Sikyonian Treasury at Olympia;! sometimes, as 
in the same Treasury at Olympia, they were lifted by 
means of a gripping implement;? and finally, at Akra- 
gas and Selinous, Olympia and Athens, the lewis was fre- 
quently employed. 


Fig. 9.— Tenons for lifting drums of columns. 


The stone-mason’s art involved cutting the blocks 
of stone (épyacia tod lov), setting them (ovvGeors), 
and finally the various operations involved in_ their 
dressing. The difference between rough and finished 
masonry consists chiefly in the way in which individual 
units are prepared before being set in place. We may 


1 Olympia, I, 45. 2 Ibid. 3 Durm, 80, No. 8. 


As 


ABs Se 


. 


. 
. 
a 


* 


ee EE 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION | 


Fic. 10. — Gallery of South Wall, Tiryns. 


accordingly distimguish masonry as primitive or roughly 
cut, polygonal, tetragonal and sphenoidal. Primitive or 
rough masonry makes use of unhewn or roughly hewn 
stones (Aor Noyddes), as distinguished from close-fitting 


28 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


masonry (Aé@ou cvvvouor). Primitive masonry occurs in 
the so-called Cyclopean walls of Tiryns. In this construc- 
tion the blocks were sometimes very large and again quite 
small. In many cases no bonding agent was used to hold 
the blocks in place. Sometimes small stones and clay 
were employed to fill up the rough joints (Fig. 10). 
When unstratified rock was used, regularity in stone 
setting is not to be expected, but when stratified or 
roughly hewn blocks were employed, they were naturally 
set in more or less horizontal courses. Besides city walls, 
retaining walls and the substructures of ordinary houses, 
when of stone, were usually of primitive or roughly cut 
masonry. ‘The retaining wall of the Temple of Apollo at 
Delphi was made of blocks whose joints were roughly cut 
surfaces, the outlines of which are more frequently curvi- 
linear than polyg- 
onal (Fig. 11). 
Such masonry 
is not altogether 
primitive and pre- 
sents possibilities 
of great refine- 
ment, but the la- | 
bor of fashioning 
blocks with joints 
Fig. 11.— Retaining wall of Temple of Apollo, 
Delphi oe so curved as to 
_make contact with 
adjoining blocks was too great to be generally adopted. 
Polygonal masonry (A ios 7roAvywvos ) is found in all periods 
and over a wide range of the Greek world. At Mycenae, 
at Samikon (Fig. 12) and elsewhere, it occurs associ- 
ated with more primitive masonry in the city walls and 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 29 


| towers; at Rhamnous, polygonal masonry is used for 
the cella walls of the Temple of Themis; at Knidos it 
| is found in the upper part of a wall, the lower por- 


a, ae ee 


Ped ee ee a ee 


Fic. 12.— Polygonal masonry from Samikon. 


tion of which is constructed of the most regular quad- 
rangular units. The Greeks of southern Italy and 
Sicily avoided it,! but it was much used in Etruria, espe- 
cially in and about Latium.? As opposed to the curvilinear 
type of masonry which we have observed at Delphi, the 
joints in this class of masonry are plane surfaces which 
cut each other at an angle, so that the faces of the blocks 
form more or less regular polygons. From the point of view 


1 Koldewey und Puchstein, 214. 2 Martha, 140. 


30 . GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


of construction, walls of polygonal masonry were in most 
cases very substantial. The joints meeting each other at 
varying angles left no continuous lines, horizontal or 
vertical, in which the walls could be easily fractured. 
From the point of view of economy, this type of masonry 
was limited chiefly to districts provided with igneous 
rocks. Even here the form of the blocks did not lend 
itself to rapid work. 

Tetragonal or quadrangular masonry (Ai@os tetpayo- 
vos) was the type which finally came to be employed 
for heavy as well as ight walls. It was not a product of 
the classic times, for we find it already in pre-Mycenaean 
buildings at Knossos, Phaistos and Hagia Triada in Crete, 


Fic. 13.— Equal coursed masonry at Magnesia. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 31 


as well as in constructions of the Mycenaean period at 
Troy.t It was the natural type for a people who were 
provided with an abundant supply of stratified rock. One 
consequence of the use of such rock and of the tetragonal 
unit was masonry in horizontal courses (dduor). When 
the blocks were uniformly of the same height, the succes- 
sive courses were superposed with great regularity. This 
kind of masonry was called the equal-coursed (A/@os 
tcodomos) (Kig. 13). Equal-coursed masonry is usually 
thought of as implying not only blocks of uniform height, 
but also of uniform breadth, and set so as to break joints. 
But other varieties of this type of masonry were em- 
ployed by the Greeks. Sometimes the blocks were of 
uniform height, but not of uniform length, or the joints were 
some vertical and some inclined, as in the case of the walls 
of Messene or in the exterior wall of the theatre at Delos. 

Even polygonal masonry might be constructed of blocks 
of equal height, as, in fact, seems to have been the case 
with some tombs at Sardes? and elsewhere. 

A further variety, known as pseudisodomum (dos 
arevdicddopos ), is usually described as composed of blocks 
set in regular courses of at least two different heights. 
Thus, the walls at Isionda in Pamphylia? and the Agrippa 
Monument at Athens (Fig. 14) are composed with great 
regularity of courses, alternately high and low. The 
western and eastern wall of the Great Altar at Pergamon 
exhibit. respectively two and three high courses set be- 
tween the low ones. Four high courses between two 


1 Doerpfeld, Troja, 1893, 41. 

2 Choisy, Rev. Arch., XXXII (1876), 75. 
3 Perrot et Chipiez, VII, 330. 

4 Pergamon, III, Taf. 7, Taf. 5. 


ay GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


low ones are found in the retaining wall of the Temple 
of Athena at Priene.! 

Imperfectly tetragonal masonry, or stonework composed 
only partially of quadrangular blocks set in courses which 
may be described as irregularly 
horizontal, is a common type 
of masonry in Greece. We 
see it in the dromos of the 
tomb of Atreus and in the 
foundations of the walls of 
Athens. Egyptian, Persian 
and Etruscan stonework was 
frequently of this type. 
Stonework of this character 
Fic. 14.— Regular, but unequal, stands halfway between po- 

Monta oe Agrippa |yeonal and regular tetragonal 

masonry. It is not to be re- 


garded merély as an easy method of utilizing blocks of 


different sizes, or as a survival of megalithic methods; it 
represents also an attempt to secure greater strength, or 
at least the appearance of it, by interlocking joints and 
irregular courses. 

Sphenoidal masonry (A@os odnvoedys), a term which 
we employ here for convenience of classification only, 
implies the use of wedge-shaped blocks, such as are used 
in arched construction. It is a common observation 
that the Greeks made little or no use of this form of 
masonry. When they built domical chambers, as at 
Mycenae and Orchomenos, or arched portals, as at Assos, 
the blocks were usually tetragonal or nearly tetragonal, 
laid in horizontal courses and overlapping until they met 


1 Priene, Fig. 99. 2 TDurm, 64. 


RN ee ae ee ae a 


— oe 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION OG 


at the top. This system of construction did not require 
wedge-shaped blocks. The Etruscans, however, who 
made use of wedge-shaped blocks in constructing portals 
and subterranean canals, derived their knowledge of all 
the arts almost exclusively from the Greeks, and it is 
difficult for us to believe that they did not learn from 
them also the use of this type of masonry. It would seem 
that the Greeks did make use of sphenoidal masonry, 
especially in the case of portals, such as the principal 
gate at Kekropoula in Acarnania,’ or the Eastern and 
Western Gates at Priene,? or the gate at Oinoanda;? in 
niches, as at Knidos;* between the buttresses of retain- 
ing walls, as at Athens and at Pergamon; in subterranean 
canals, such as those at Athens,® and in vaulted passages, 
as in the theatre of Sikyon;°® and for bridges, such as 
that at Kerokampi in Laconia. It seems hardly probable 
that Democritus of Abdera’ should have written out a 
theory of the vault unless he had been familiar with 
existing examples. 

Besides the blocks of the geometrical shapes above 
described, the builder in stone used also cylindrical blocks 
for columns and sculptured blocks for capitals, bases, 
friezes, cornices and other decorative mouldings, the 
structural character of which will receive specific attention. 

In megalithic masonry no specific bonding was necessary, 
as gravity suffices to hold large blocks together. But in 

1 Heuzey, Mont Olympe, pl. 9. 
2 Priene, 43-44. 
. 8 Petersen und von Luschan, Taf. 28. 
4 Texier, III, pl. 160. 
5 Ziller, in Ath. Mitt., If, 107-181, Taf. 6-9. 


6 Frazer, Paus., UI, 50. 
7 Burckhardt, IIT, 413-414. 


34. GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


small stone construction, various devices were required to 
bond the stonework into a mass sufficiently strong to re- 
sist disturbance. Clay mortar (7nA0s) was used in primi- 
tive masonry as a bonding device; but it had no great 
tenacity, and its value ceased when smaller building 
blocks prevailed. Lime mortar (appoxovia, ALOcKorra) 
was known to the Phoenicians and used occasionally by 
the Greeks. It was probably Greek experience that led 
the way for the rules laid down by Vitruvius for making 
mortar. Lime mortar is found in the socle of the wall of 
the Stoa of Eumenes at Pergamon,! and a very tenacious 
quality of it in subterranean and subaqueous construction, 
as, for example, in the drains at Olympia and in the 
moles of the Peiraieus. But in general the Greeks, from 
force of habit or from choice, preferred dry masonry and 
bonded their stonework by wooden or metallic clamps. 
Dowels (redo) of wood or metal were employed in bond- 
ing together the drums of columns. ‘These were cylin- 
drical in form and mortised into cubical blocks (éu7reda) 
of wood or metal, which being set in the drum below, 
permitted an expansion of the dowel without injury 
to the drum. Frequently the éuwo\va were omitted.” 


Wooden clamps were sometimes used, as in the Temple of | 


Athena at Pergamon, for horizontal bonding, but metallic 
clamps were usually preferred. Metal clamps had been 
used by Hittites, Persians and Phoenicians, and in Greek 


lands were more common in the East than in the West. 


They were frequently made of iron, or of iron cased in 
bronze, and were held in place by a solder of lead 
(noruBdoyoia). These clamps were of various shapes 


1 Pergamon, II, 74. 
2 Koldewey und Puchstein, 225-226. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION oD 


(Figs. 15-18), all of which occur in the sixth-century 
work and continued to be used with local variations and 
preferences through the classic period. It was not until 
the Hellenistic period that mortar began to be substituted — 
for metallic clamps. 

Another bonding method in stone construction is 
that of notching. This occurred in walls and also in 
entablatures. At the Amykleion, near Sparta, founda- 


Figs. 15-18.— Clamps of various shapes. 


tions are still visible where several blocks are notched 
into a course of larger blocks at right angles to them. 
At Eretria, the city walls show courses of stone bonded 
together by notching (Fig. 19). When cornices of stone 
were substituted for wood, these continued to be notched 
to receive the rafters of the roof. The corner pieces 
of the raking cornice of the gable were also notched 
to prevent the sliding of the gable cornice. ‘The tri- 
glyphs were often notched so as to hold the metopes in 
place. | . | 
Stone-masons sometimes borrowed from builders in brick 
the old method of inserting horizontal and transverse 
blocks of wood, to bond together the separate units in 
the construction of a wall. This type of bonding occurs 
at Mycenae, Thera and elsewhere, but it was not a prac- 


tical method for stonework and was soon abandoned. 


36 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Dry masonry could not have reached the perfection it 
did among the Greeks, had they not expended great care 
upon dressing the faces and joints of each separate block. 
The faces were only roughly dressed when put in place. 


Fic. 19. — Notched masonry at Eretria. 


The unfinished temple at Segesta shows us stylobate 
blocks whose undressed faces still retain even the tenons 
by means of which the blocks were lifted to their places, 
columns whose channellings have never been executed and 
abaci which still retain their edge protectors (aepitévera ). 
The risk of damaging the edges of the blocks during 
the process of setting them in place was thus avoided. 
When a building was erected in the rough, the upper 
part seems to have been dressed first and the lower part 


chistes Sy 
a 


Gvpwpis), occurs 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION Sie 


last. The horizontal bed joints (Sdaces) and the lateral 
or vertical joints (a7ricvtes ‘appot) were dressed so as to 
fit as closely as possible. In the case of poros masonry, 
stucco was sometimes employed, as in the Treasury of 
Megara at Olympia, to make the rough joints smooth, but 
in marble buildings the dressing was done by fine chiselling. 
At the Treasury of Megara, the entire surface of each hori- 
zontal joint was 
dressed, but in 
the vertical joints 
an economy of 
effort was reached 
by dressing only 
near the _ edges. 
This marginal 
drafting, or frame- 
like dressing (‘ava- 


throughout the 
whole history of 
Greek stonework. 
In pre-Mycenaean 
masonry at Palaio- 
kastro in Crete, at 
inocel eraion, 
Olympia,! and at 
the Amkyleion near 
Sparta, the blocks |g Se 
barely touch each Fie. 20.— Anathyrosis from wall of Propylaia, 
other at the edges. ALHEEE 

In the archaic and classic period this drafting shows 
sometimes a narrow and sometimes a wider band (Fig. 20). 


1 Olympia, II, 35. 


38 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


The joints were carefully washed with nitre and water 
and then by various devices pushed into close contact 
before the blocks were clamped.! The extreme concern 
which the Greeks gave to the matter of dressing the joints 


is well exhibited in the very detailed specifications for en- - 


larging the pavement about the Temple of Zeus at Leba- 
deia.2 Here we find indicated the character of the tooling, 
the measurements for the marginal dressing and a manifest 
anxiety for close-fitting joints. 

Similar care was exhibited in all Greek marble construc- 
tion during the classic and Hellenistic period. 

4. Merats. Metals, though not extensively used in 
Greek architecture, were nevertheless of importance for 
constructive as well as for decorative purposes. In stone 
and marble buildings metal clamps and dowels were em- 
ployed from a very early period. These were usually 
made of iron, sometimes of bronze, and held in place by 
means of molten lead. The holes through which the lead 


was poured may be readily discovered upon blocks from 


ruined buildings. Iron was also occasionally used for the 
reénforcement of stone when insufficiently strong. An 
excellent example of this may be found at the Olympieion 


at Akragas.® In this gigantic structure the epistyle blocks © 


were not long enough or strong enough to bear the super- 
incumbent weight. Hence, between the intercolumnia- 
tions bars of iron were employed to aid in the support of 
the entablature. Wrought iron-work of a high quality 
was used by the Greeks who, from the days of Homer, 


1 Choisy, I, 274. e 

2 Choisy, Etudes, 170-211 ; Fabricius, 5-16. 

8 Hittorff et Zanth, 566 ; Koldewey und Puchstein, 163. 
= Od: UB, 391-398. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 39 


appear to have known how to temper iron so as to increase 
its strength. | 

Of iron and of bronze were the coverings for door-posts 
and the channels or tracks in which the doors swung. 
Bronze was sometimes used for door-sills, as in the Par- 
thenon; in decoration, as in the oculi of Ionic capitals and 
rosettes of ceiling cofferings in the Erechtheion; or for 
the adornment of walls, as in the Tholos of Atreus at 
Mycenae. ‘The decoration of the engaged columns at the 
Tholos of Atreus suggests also the prevalence of cover- 
ings of hammered bronze as a protection for wooden 
columns. Doors adorned either with hammered reliefs, 
as the Gates at Balawat,! or with moulded ornaments, as 
in Roman and Byzantine times, appear to have been used 
by the Greeks. Such were the gates of the Temple of 
Artemis at Miletos.2 According to Babin,? who described 
Athens in 1672, the doors of the Theseion were made of 
iron, but it is very unlikely that these dated from the 
classic Greek period. 

Metal was not infrequently used for grilles (xiy«r ies, 
KayKéAXoL, Ppayyol), which served as barriers in a colon- 
nade or to replace solid doors. 

5. FOUNDATIONS AND PAVEMENTS. The foundations 
of buildings varied in many ways. ‘The ground, whether 
rocky or otherwise, had first to be cleared. Foundations 
were then laid either of sand, as in the Treasury of 
Sybaris at Olympia; or of pebbles, as in the Heraion; 
or of ashes, as in the Temple of Artemis at Ephesos; or 
of polygonal masonry, as.in the Treasury of Syracuse at 
Olympia; or of imperfectly tetragonal masonry, as in the 


1 Perrot et Chipiez, II, Pl. 12. 2 C.I.G. 2885 d, p. 1121. 
8 Quoted by Hittorff et Zanth, 568. 


40 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Treasury of Megara at Olympia; or of regular tetragonal 


masonry, as in the Temple of Concordia at Akragas. In 
most buildings we may distinguish the structural foun- 
dations (@euédva) placed beneath walls and columns from 
the mere filling (yon) beneath the voids. The filling might 
be of earth or of the splinters left by the stone-cutters. 
Foundations were sometimes concealed, sometimes visible. 
Thus the base upon which a Greek temple rested consisted 
of the subterranean foundation (ctepeoBarns, vrevOuvTnpia, 
vrodouat), and the visible portion, likened to a boot 
(xpnTidmpa, Kpniidaiov, kpnris), and generally of finer 
masonry, consisted of a series of steps or platforms. It 
is often convenient to distinguish that portion of the 
krepidoma which stands beneath a row of columns as 
the stylobate (atvAoBartns), that beneath the walls as the 
toichobate (rovyoBarns), and that beneath the pavement 
as the stromatobate (oTpwparoBatns). Stylobates may be 
classified, according to the constructive methods employed, 
as megalithic, monolithic, dilithic and polylithic.1 Meg- 
alithic stylobates consist of huge blocks, each bearing 
several columns. Monolithic stylobates, as in Temple C, 
Selinous, consist of blocks equal in length to the interaxial 
spacing of the column. The advantage of this system is 
that the columns act as cover joints and thus protect in a 
measure the substructure. Dilithic stylobates, however, 
consisting of one block beneath each column and one 
beneath each intercolumniation, were more economical 
and became the canonical type in the classie period. At 
first the subcolumnar blocks were the larger, but later 
subcolumnar and intercolumnar blocks were equal. The 
Temple of Athena at Pergamon exhibits a trilithie system 


1 This classification is employed by Koldewey und Puchstein. 


a a 


s 
3 
a 
4 
xy 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 41 


with one subcolumnar to two intercolumnar blocks. Poly- 
lithic stylobates, in which no regular system was followed, 
occur chiefly in the archaic period. 

In the construction of the krepidoma, megalithic methods 
sometimes prevailed, and two or more steps were cut from 
the same block. The usual method, however, was to build 
up the bases in courses in which each step corresponded 
to a single course of masonry. The blocks constituting 
the visible steps were naturally more carefully cut and 
- finished than the core of the masonry. 

Pavements of stone (AcO@coTpwta, cTp@pata, édadn) were 
of various kinds. ‘There were cobble-stone pavements, as 
in the large courtyard at Tiryns; irregular blocks, as in 
the palace of Minos at Knossos; quadrangular and square 
slabs, like those of the peristyles and courts of temples; 
and marble mosaic pavements, like those favored by the 
kings of Pergamon. The more regular kinds of pavements 
required regular foundations. The earliest mosaic pave- 
ments corresponded in technique to primitive masonry, 
being composed of uncut pebbles of various colors. In 
the classic period, mosaics composed of small cubical 
blocks, opus tesselatum, or of thin slabs cut irregularly in 
accordance with a design, opus Alexandrinum, were fre- 
quently substituted for the earlier type. 

6. WALLS, DooRWAyYs AND WINpDOowsS. ‘The construc- 
tion of walls (reiyn, rotyor) varied according to circum- 
stances. Walls of towns (te/y7) were necessarily heavy and 
called for massive construction. In the Mycenaean period 
they were sometimes broad enough to permit of galleries 
and casements within the solid portion of the walls. But it 
was soon discovered that walls might be more economically 
constructed of outer revetments of masonry and an inner 


42, GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


core of earth or rubble (€urAexrov). Such was the polyg- 
onal Themistoklean wall as well as the later wall of tetrag- 
onal masonry, remains of which are found between the 
Dipylon and the Sacred Gate of Athens.} 

The same constructive principle is seen in the much 
narrower walls of the Temple of Zeus at Labranda.? 
Here the central space between the two revetments was 
too narrow to require filling. ‘This wall also illustrates 
the type called diatonikon (d:atouxov), the two faces being 
bonded together by tie blocks (Aol dsvatovyou) which 
penetrate the entire thickness of the wall (Fig. 21). 

; Walls of houses 
(rotyot) were thin 
enough to consist, 
except at the base, 
of single, solid rows 
of tetragonal blocks. 
At the base was or- 
dinarily a levelling 
course or socle (ev- 
O@vvtnpia), above 
which was a_ high 
course of slabs of 
stone set on edge (CopOocrarns)?. From a constructive 
point of view, this did not strengthen the base of the wall, 
and may be best explained as a survival in appearance 
only of heavy courses of stone which, in earlier days 
were laid at the base of crude brick walls. Above 

1 Frazer, Paus., II, 44. 2 Lebas, Arch. As. Min., II, Pl. 8. 

3 See Fig. 39. 

4 This must have been a very ancient practice, since orthostatai as 


revetments occur in Assyrian, Persian, Hittite, and Jewish, as well as in 
Greek, architecture (cf. Koldewey, Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli, p. 195). 


Fic. 21.— Diatonikon masonry. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 43 


the orthostatai were laid course upon course of blocks 
resembling bricks and, in fact, bearing the same name 
(wAivOos). In the classic period the jointing of these 
blocks was perfectly regular and definitely related to that 
of the orthostatai. Besides a base, many walls had also a 
capital Cemixpavop, ’emtxpavitis) in the form of a frieze or 
cornice. ‘The jointing of the wall was also related to the 
jointing of its capital. 

Curved walls required specifically shaped blocks. The 
most common type, that of the circular buildings, demanded 
wedge-shaped blocks with curved faces, but involved no 
new constructive principle. 

Pilasters, and the projecting ends of walls known as para- 
stades (7apactades) or antae, show two structural types. 
One is represented in the Porch of the Maidens at Athens. 
Here the pilasters are single slabs of marble, mere revet- 
ments, resembling the wooden posts or boards by which 
the ends of crude brick walls were protected. At the 
Pinakotheke of the Propylaia at Athens, they are built 
up of large blocks, each of which corresponds in height to 
that of two coursesin the wall. In the Temple of Athena 
Nike and in the Erechtheion, a second type of construc- 
tion is exhibited. Here the parastades are actually the 
ends of walls and composed of the same number of courses. 

Doorways (@up@pyara) and windows (Oupiées, d7raé), from 
a constructive point of view, may be classed as either 
framed or unframed. The framed variety consisted of 
sill (&trotdvatov, ovdcs, Bndrcs), jambs (otaOuol, drral, 
mTapaoTdoes ) and lintel (é7eptevaion, tbrrepPvpiov). Wooden 
frames, the natural protectors of openings in walls of crude 
construction, are found also in many walls of regularly cut 
masonry. Not only in Troy and Tiryns and Mycenae do we 


44 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


find evidence of doorways with wooden jambs and lintels, 
but also in some stone buildings of the classic period. How- 
ever, stone and marble frames for doorways were usually 
substituted for wood in stone and marble buildings. On the 
island of Naxos 
there stands a 
huge marble 
door-frame (Fig. 
22) whose jambs 
are heavy enough 
to serve as sup- 
ports of the lin- 
tel, but ordinarily 
door-jambs were 
mere revetments. 
Many doorways, 
especially in for- 
tification walls, 
were left un- 
framed. Of this 
type the gate- 
ways at Assos 
furnish several 
excellent ex- 
amples. When constructed of finely jointed masonry, door- 
ways had no need of protecting revetments. Even the 


Fic. 22.— Door-frame at Naxos. 


lintel was sometimes replaced by an arch. When the wall — 


was extended above the door-frame, two devices were 
employed to relieve the lintel. The first was to leave 
an opening above it. The city gate and the entrance 
to the beehive tombs at Mycenae were thus constructed. 
The second device was to set the lintelitself with its planes 


ES ee ae at Sn eee 


es » 
— 7 sere ie. 


a 
¥ 
. 
. 
* 
i 
4 
4 
q 
4 
> 
¢ 


air 
r <r’ 


pa, eee ma: oe eae 
EE Aidan: faa Pin hls) Sele 1: 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 45 


of stratification posed vertically, since in this position its 
resistance to flexure was greater. 

Doors (vat, Ovpat, cavides, Gupetpa) were either single 
or double (éuxAédes), and might be further subdivided by 
folding. When double they sometimes closed against a 
central post (mérw7ov) which, as in the Arsenal at the 
Peiraieus, might be of considerable depth. In their con- 
struction they consisted of vertical stiles (cxjmrTpa) with 
horizontal rails (€vya) enclosing rectangular panels (rTvp- 
qava). ‘That each door, or wing of a door, should con- 
tain no more than two panels seems to have been the rule 
throughout the classic period. Later, a larger number of 
panellings were introduced. In a wall decoration from 
the house of Sallust! three superposed panels are ex- 
hibited ; ina Roman relief in the Lateran Museum 2 we see 
a door with four superposed panels. In the Byzantine 
and Mediaeval period the number of panels was greatly 
increased. In the Renaissance period they were again 
diminished. Doors revolved upon posts (doves, otpo- 
diyyes, Gaipot) clad with metal and set in metal-clad 
sockets (otpodeis, oApicxor). This system flourished in 
Greece in all periods. ‘They were fastened by bars (uav- 
daroi, KAnOpa, woxrol), also by lock and key (x«nreides), 
and were provided with door handles or knockers (ém- 
oTATTHPES, KOpakes, KOpwVN, poTTpa). Some doors in the 
Erechtheion seem to have been made partly of marble 
and partly of Eleusinian stone; those of the Temple of 
Artemis at Miletos were of bronze; at Ephesos, Eleusis 
and Epidauros, the temple doors were of wood.* 

1 Mau, 450. 2 Schreiber, Taf. 9, Fig. 5. 


8 Schliemann, Tiryns, 281; Heuzey et Daumet, 230, 254, Pl. 21. 
4 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Janua. 


46 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


7. COLUMNS AND ENTABLATURES, CEILINGS AND ROOFS. 
The column (xiv, ordXos) consisted of base, shaft and cap- 


ital, and carried an entablature composed of epistyle, frieze 


and cornice. Stone bases existed from prehistoric times. 
Flat stones served as foundations for wooden columns in 
the palaces at Troy, Tiryns and Mycenae. Flat blocks of 


regular form composed the Doric stylobate, the construc- — 


tion of which has been already considered. Another type 
of base of cylindrical form existed in the Mycenaean 
period and became the canonic type for Ionic architecture. 
Its varieties of form do not concern us here. Construc- 
tively, the entire base was seldom a part of the shaft, as 
in the Ionic niche in the Stoa at Pergamon.! Occasion- 
ally, as in the bases of the Erechtheion, the upper torus 
is constructed as a part of the shaft (Fig. 23). But 


Fic. 23. — Base from Erech- Fic. 24.— Basefrom Temple ~ 
theion, Athens. of Nike, Athens. 


ordinarily, as in the Temple of Athena Nike (Fig. 24), 
the upper torus is made a part of the base, a mode of 
construction which is more economical of material, but 
which overlooks the functional nature of the base as a 
distributer of the superincumbent weight over a wider 
surface. 

The shaft of the column (xavA/ov, ca) was sometimes 
monolithic, as in the Temple of Apollo at Corinth and in 
some of the columns of the Temple of Aphaia at Aegina, 


1 Pergamon, Il, Taf. 27. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 47 


in those of the Temple of Athena Nike at Athens, and in - 
the Temple of Zeus at Aizanoi; but more frequently the 
shaft was composed of a series of drums (odovduroz). 
Archaic columns, especially such as were covered with 
stucco, were composed of few drums of irregular height. 
In the classic and Hellenistic periods the drums were 
more numerous and exhibit more uniformity in respect to 
height. Doric drums were bonded together, as has been 
already indicated, by wooden, and Ionic drums usually by 
iron, dowels. ‘The joints were dressed only near the 
edges. The lowest drum of a Doric column ordinarily 
rested on its stylobate without the assistance of dowels. 
Sometimes, however, as in the Temples of Herakles at 
Akragas and of Athena Polias at Pergamon, the columns 
were dowelled to their stylobates. Ionic shafts were 
usually dowelled to their bases, but the bases rest on their 
foundations without artificial fastening. 

The capital of a column (xvdxpavoy, err ikpavov, Kepanrn ) 
was almost invariably monolithic. ‘The Doric capital, in- 
cluding the abacus, echinus, neck and a portion of the 
shaft, was carved from a single block. Polylithic capitals, 
being functionally imperfect, were rarely employed; but 
in the so-called Basilica at Paestum ! there are columns in 
which an abacus of rougher stone rests upon an echinus 
carved from a separate block. In gigantic structures like 
the Temple of Zeus at Akragas the capitals were neces- 
sarily polylithic. The means by which the complex 
curves of the Doric echinus were obtained is not cer- 
tainly known, but the use of a lathe? seems probable. 


1 An inscription recently found indicates that the so-called Basilica was 
probably a temple of Poseidon. See Rev. Arch , IX (1907), 167. 
2 Penrose, 48, note 1. 


48 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Grooves or channellings were carved on the lower part of 
the capital block before it was put in place, but the chan- 
nellings of the shaft were usually deferred until after the 


erection of the column. This precaution insured sharp 


profiles. In order to protect the arrises of the channel- 
lings from injury, the capital block, before being set in 
place, was bevelled at its base. The drum nearest the 
capital was also bevelled, thus producing an incised ring 
below the neck of the capital. : 

The Ionic capital, including its abacus, volutes and echi- 
nus, was occasionally carved from the same block as the 
uppermost part of the shaft, as in the capitals of Temple 
B, Selinous.! In the Eastern porch of the Erechtheion 
the echinus and decorated necking are constructively part 
of the shaft. But in the capitals of the Propylaia at 
Athens, at the Temple of Nike, and elsewhere, the echinus 
is carved as part of the capital block. 

The entablature, consisting of epistyle, frieze and cor- 
nice, exhibits many variations in construction. The 
monolithic type, in which all the members would appear 
in each block, is rare, and confined to small buildings, as 
the interior order of the Philippeion at Olympia? or the 


niches in the Stoa at Pergamon.? A combination of epi- — 


style and frieze occurs more frequently in interiors and in 
buildings of late date, as in the upper order of the Stoa at 
Pergamon. Ordinarily, epistyle, frieze and cornice were 


constructed separately, and artificially bonded together. 


Each of these members was in its construction more fre- 
quently complex than simple. ‘The epistyle was seldom 
monolithic, as in Temple F, Selinous and in the Temple of 


1 Hittorff et Zanth, Pl. 19; Choisy, I, 354. 2 Olympia, II, 81. 
8 Pergamon, Il, Taf. 26, 27. 


pate 
: A acelag S 
a ah 


i j moe 
a ee eo 7 cs 
Be eb es a ee | wea ee ae 


4 
“a 
fi: 
a 
: 
4 
q 
a 
>. 
3 
A 
‘4 
> 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 49 


_ 
_ 


Selinous. 


Apollo at Corinth. It was usually, in respect to depth, di- 
vided into two or more slabs and not infrequently built up 
in courses. ‘The epistyle of the , 3 
Temple of Concordia - Akra- i7/ Y/ V 
gas was composed of two such | | 
slabs, that of the Parthenon of 
three (Fig. 25). Such epistyles Lo L ij 
in large buildings were more 
practical than heavy monoliths. VU V1 U3 
In Paestum, Selinous (Fig. 26) Fic. 25.—Epistyle from Par- 
and elsewhere epistyles were Be 
constructed of two or more courses. In very large build- 
ings, such as the Temple of Zeus at Akragas, single-coursed 
epistyles were impossible. 
Even in smaller buildings it 
was more economical to adopt 
two-coursed epistyles and thus 
reduce the size of the upper 
blocks which were of finer 
quality. In marble buildings 
Doric epistyles were usually 
single coursed, their crowning 
mouldings being carved on the 
epistyle blocks. Ionic epistyles, 
not only by their overhanging 
fasciae preserved the form of 
epistyles built up in successive 
courses, but also had their crowning mouldings carved 
from separate blocks. 
The frieze rested upon the epistyle. It was almost in- 
variably decorated, sometimes with figured decoration. 
Constructively, the frieze was a complex member, built 
E 


50 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


up in a variety of ways. It was, in the archaic period, 
often composed of at least two courses, which might be 


equal or unequal in height. In the Old Temple of © 


Athena at Athens! the triglyphs were built up in courses ; 
at ‘Temple F’, Selinous, metopes, as well as triglyphs, were 


thus constructed. When covered with stucco the hori- — 


zontal joints would be concealed, but in marble buildings, 
which were not so covered, these joints would be visible. 
Hence in the classic period friezes were usually on the 
exterior monolithic in respect to height, though sometimes 
built up in courses on the back. 

In its horizontal aspect the Ionic frieze was as 
continuous as was practicable. It was regarded as a 
girdle (dvafwua) encircling a building, undivided, except 
by such joints as were inevitable, and which were as far 
as possible concealed from view. The Doric frieze 


was, however, divided into triglyphs (tpéyAuvdov) and 


metopes (yerd7rat), and these appear in the earliest 
temples to have been composed of separate blocks, 
artificially bonded. In the so-called Temple of Demeter 
at Paestum triglyphs and metopes were so loosely juxta- 
posed that the triglyphs have now disappeared altogether. 


A step in the direction of greater unity of construction — 


is seen in the Temple of Concordia, Akragas, where each 
triglyph was formed from the same block as the adjoining 
metope. At Pergamon two triglyphs and a metope or 
two metopes and a triglyph were sometimes united in a 
single block. In smaller buildings it was practicable to 
carry this fusion further still. However, the normal 
method of constructing a triglyphal frieze, especially when 


the metopes were decorated with relief sculpture, is ex- . 


1 Wiegand, 8. 


it Pe -s : Die ra 
“ Pid ee | bie en] 
NS ge en eae PRS, eee | Re ES eS ee ee 


SS FP FO es ene ae ee ae 


— a 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 51 


hibited in the Parthenon (Fig. 27). Here the metopes 
are relatively thin slabs which are mortised into rectangu- 
lar grooves cut into the sides of the triglyph blocks. In 
the Choragic Monument of Nikias at Athens,’ marble 
metopes were similarly mortised into poros triglyphs. 
Viewed in respect to depth or thickness, the frieze is 


— A _—_ = — — 


Fig. 27. — Triglyphal frieze of Parthenon. 


composed of an external decorated face or kosmophoros, 
and an antithema or back (av7/@nua), usually undeco- 
rated except by a cap moulding. The antithema usually 
consisted of two courses, especially when capped by a 
sculptured moulding. It was in the earlier buildings set 
into immediate juxtaposition to the kosmophoros, with or 
without interlocking joints; but as this involved a waste 
of material and weighted the colonnade unnecessarily, the 
kosmophoros and antithema in marble buildings were 
usually separated a short distance from each other. 

The construction of the cornice (yetcov) exhibited also 


1 Doerpfeld, in Ath. Mitt., X (1885), 222. 


52 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


its own peculiarities. -It frequently consisted of two or 
more courses of masonry. In Doric buildings the lower 
cornice block was of considerable depth. This permitted 
the cornice to project well 
beyond the face of the build- 


ing, and bound together the 

—g  Kosman as andantithema 
_ of the frieze. The upper 

_. portion of the cornice was 
ey 7 usually built up in two or 
more courses, the upper 

_block carrying the cap 


Fic. 28. cE of Temple D, moulding (Fig. 28). 

sense In Ionic buildings, such 
as the Temple of Athena at Priene,! dentils (yetotmrodes ), 
geison and sima were all composed of separate blocks. 
In smaller buildings a fusion was usually made of these 
separate members. Thus, in the Temple of Asklepios 
at Priene,? geison and sima, and in the Propylon at 
Priene,® dentils and geison, are carved from a single block. 
In the altar of the Temple of Athena,‘ dentils, geison and 
sima are all carved from one block. 

The blocks composing the cornice were, in early times, 
irregular as to length. Thus, the joints of an archaic 
Doric cornice might fall in the middle of a mutule, or 
‘of the space between two mutules. The classic build- 
ers more carefully regulated the lengths of the~cornice 
blocks. Thus, they usually arranged that the cornice 
block of the Doric order should carry one mutule and 
one via.® Owing to the unequal divisions of the tri- 


1 Priene, Fig. 72. 2 Ibid., Fig. 113, 117. 8 Ibid., Fig. 105. 
4 Tbid., Fig. 98. 5 Middleton, J.H.S., Suppl. 3 (1900), 9, Pl. 5. 


MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 583 


elyphal frieze, the cornice blocks were only approximately 
uniform in length. 

The soffits of the Doric cornice in the form of mutules 
with trunnels were in early examples carved from the 
same block as the cornice. Later the trunnels usually, 
and the mutules occasionally, were carved separately and 
fastened securely in place. 

Whereas wooden ceilings continued to be used for 
closed structures, stone and marble ceilings were often 
employed to cover the peristyle and other porches ex- 
posed to the air. The construction of such ceilings fol- 
lowed the precedents of wooden construction, exhibiting 
the large beams and cofferings closed by panels. The 
beams were notched so as to hold the coffered blocks 
secure. Sometimes, as at the Theseion and the Parthe- 

non (Fig. 29), large slabs carried many Suess. Again, 
as at Priene, large and 
deep cofferings were 
built up like a series 
of superposed boxes. 

The roof (otéyn, 
éemwpopia), except on 
small buildings like 
the Tower of the 
Winds, was never 
constructed _ entirely 
of stone or marble. 
The substitution of wooden beams and rafters and pur- 
lins remained, while marble was substituted for terra-cotta 
for the roofing tiles, gable cornices, acroteria and simae. 
The substitution of marble for terra-cotta tiles intro- 
duced no new problems. The stone and marble gable 


V4 
drtpeeti 
bh BS ee 


r---4 


re---4 


oI roi | 
Cosa 


taSaa) 


Sen Ch oe aE 
LY 
oe 
<<a r---74 
SA hts 


r 
' 
' 
' 
L 
c 
' 
' 
' 
L 


het ea ( pstastarea fa 


| aaa} 
SSeS, | 

wt 

A Gee 

[ ees 

at 


r 
r- 
t 


Fic. 29. — Parthenon coffering. 


54 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


cornice, however, must have given the early architects some — 
anxiety lest the blocks 
should slide down the — 
inclined wall of the tym- | 
panon. In some cases 
this danger was averted - 
by building portions ot 


the lower extremities 03 

| the saddle large blocks 

Fie. 30.— Acroterion block of the were horizontally posed 
Parthenon. . Z 

and weighted with acro- 


CHAPTER II 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 


1. FounpAtions. — The form of subterranean founda- 
tions (aTtepeoBarat) vary chiefly in their plan, although it 
may be noted that foundation walls are usually thicker at 
the base than at the summit. 

In plan, they were rarely continuous structures like 
those of the pyramids of Egypt or the ziggurats of 
Babylonia. Palaces of the Mycenaean age, as well as the 
oldest temples, like the Heraion at Olympia,! already 
exhibit the distinction between structural foundations 
(Oeuédta) placed beneath walls and columns, and the mere 
filling (yo7) beneath the voids. | 

Column foundations, or stylobates (oTvAoBatar), dif- 
fered sometimes in size from the wall foundations, 
being usually of greater thickness than the wall founda- 
tions in the same buildings. Exterior peristyles, espe- 
cially when provided with a series of steps, had continuous 
foundations, but interior colonnades did not require 
them. In the case of Philon’s Arsenal at the Peiraieus, 
as well as in the Hellenistic porticos at Athens and 
Pergamon, each column had its own special foundation,” 
nevertheless temples show continuous foundations for 
interior colonnades throughout the whole history of Greek 
architecture. 

1 Olympia, I, Taf. 18. 2Doerpfeld, in Ath. Mitt., VIII (1883), 150. 


55 


OG GREEK ARCHITECTURE 

Wall foundations, toichobates or teichobates (Crovyo- 
Barat, TexyoPRarat), extended in many cases above ground 
and were variously fashioned. The simplest method of 
giving emphasis to the foundation is to leave visible the 
uppermost course. ‘This may be identical with the base 
or socle of the superstructure. A socle of this nature 
was designed for Philon’s Arsenal. On account of its 
smoothed and levelled character it was known as the 
evOuvrnpia, and its constituent blocks as tmoBatipes, or 
Ao. Bacputaior. Viewed in elevation, this socle becomes 
the base for the wall and has, consequently, been desig- 
nated by Koldewey!? as the toichobate. 

A second and more. marked form is the high, stepped 
base, the krepidoma (xpniid@pa, Kxpnidaiov, xpntis), 
upon which Greek temples usually rested. Rarely, as in 
Stratos (Fig. 31), were the steps of the krepidoma low 
enough to be used as stairs. For this purpose sometimes 
a ramp was constructed in front of the temple, as in the later 
Heraion at Argos? and the Temple of Zeus at Olympia,’ 
but more frequently either the entire front or the central 
portion of the front of the krepidoma was converted. into 
a practical stairway by the introduction of steps of con- 
venient height. 


As a whole, however, the krepidoma was not a stairway, — 


but a visible foundation, the form and proportions of 
which were not determined by considerations of mere 
practical convenience. ‘The number of steps or platforms 
composing the krepidoma was not uniformly the same. 
There was no sacred number of platforms, as in the 
ziggurats of Mesopotamia. The Temple of Hera at 


1Koldewey und Puchstein, 208. “ Waldstein, PAG 
3 Olympia, I, Taf. 9. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 5T 


Olympia and the Old Temple of Athena at Athens had 
each a krepidoma consisting of a single step or platform ; 
the so-called Temple of Theseus at Athens had a krepi- 
doma of two steps; the common type, exemplified in 
the Temple of Zeus at Olympia and in the Parthenon, 


Fic, 31.— Base of Temple at Stratos in Akarnania. 


displayed three steps and was accordingly known as the 
tpibacwos. A larger number of steps was sometimes 
reached. Temple D at Selinous had a krepidoma of four 
steps and the old Greek Temple at Pompeii! one of five 
steps, that of the Temple of Apollo Smintheus in the 
Troad? had eleven steps. When a temple was placed 
upon a hillside, the number of steps on the side toward 


1Von Duhn, Taf. 2. 2Ton. Ant., IV, Pl. 26. 


58 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the lower level of the hill was, naturally, greater than 
the number on the upper level. 

From the point of view of elevation, the krepidoma 
may be considered as composed of the stylobate or upper 
step and. of one or more lower steps. If a term were 
needed to distinguish these from the stylobate on the one 
hand and the invisible stereobate on the other, the lower 
steps might well be designated the substylobates. 

An interesting peculiarity in the krepidoma of some 
Greek temples is its convex character. The apparently 
horizontal edges of the stylobate and lower steps are found, 
in these cases, to follow the boundary line of a regular 
polygon which is large enough to be considered the are of 
a circle. ‘This curvature of horizontal surfaces is found 
in the Temple of Apollo at Corinth and in the so-called 
Temple of Poseidon at Paestum; in many buildings of 
the classic period, such as the Theseion, the Parthenon 
and the Propylaia at Athens; and in a few Hellenistic 
and Roman buildings, such as the Temple of Athena at 
Pergamon and in the Maison Carrée at Nimes. That this 
curvature was intentional seems to be proved by its 
occurrence in the rock-cut base of the Temple of Apollo 
at Corinth,! and by its survival in Mediaeval architecture.? 
In some cases, as at Corinth, it was confined to the facades ; 
in others, as in the Temple of Athena at Pergamon? it was 
restricted to the long sides; more frequently, when found 
at all, it occurs both in the long and in the short sides of 
the krepidoma. | 

A third form of visible foundation for buildings, the 
podium, may be seen in the Temple of Despoina at 


1 Doerpfeld, in Ath. Mitt., XI (1886), 303. 
2 Goodyear, Arch. Rec., VI (1897), 481. 8 Pergamon, II, 28. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 59 


Lykosoura (Fig. 32). The pseudo-peripteral Temple of 
Zeus at Akragas is set upon a base which may be described as 
a compromise between a podium and a stepped krepidoma.! 
Tombs, such as the Mausoleion at Halikarnassos, were 


Fic. 32.— Podium of Temple of Despoina at Lykosoura. 


sometimes set upon lofty podia. Such was also the dis- 
position of the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates at Athens. 
According to Vitruvius,” the podium may be described from 
the base upward as consisting of the plinth, base mould- 
ing, the body or die, the cap or cornice moulding, and some- 
times a lysis to connect the podium with the superstructure. 

The refinements of curvature which were introduced 
into the krepidoma seem also to have been applied to 


1 Koldewey und Puchstein, 161. 2 Vitruvius, III, 4, 5. 


XS, 7 ‘ , ‘sUsvIyy ‘quIOy, 8,U01EYT, JO wNIpog — ‘ee “OI é 


GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


60 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 61 


podia. The die of the podium of the so-called Tomb of 
Theron at Akragas! not only diminishes in breadth from 
base to summit, but its outer angles, seen in clear profile 
against the sky, are distinctly curved (Fig. 33). In the 
case of a long low podium, the eye would be attracted by 
the horizontal, rather than by the vertical, lines. This is 
the case with the podium of the Maison Carrée at Nimes, 
which shows a convex curvature in plan.? 

The form of pavement foundations (otpwpatoBarTar), 
being concealed from view, are of archaeological, rather 
than architectural, interest. It is, however, not uninter- 
esting to observe that pavement foundations, when not a 
formless mass of rubble or sand, were constructed some- 
times as a series of piers and sometimes as 
continuous series of parallel walls. Both of 
the latter types are displayed in the founda- 
tions of the Altar of Zeus at Akragas.? 

Parallel in form and development to temple 
bases were the bases of statues and other 
votive offerings. A series of these bases 
(BaOpa), found at Olympia, have been de- 
scribed by Purgold.* In the archaic period, Hie. 34; — 
such bases were usually devoid of mouldings, Pees 
as, for example, the stepped rectangular base 
erected by a certain Praxiteles at Olympia about 500 B.c., 
and the stepped circular base for the statue of Nestor by 
Onatas. During the fifth century, however, profiled 
bases began to appear. The pedestal for the statue of 
Kyniskos (Fig. 34) by Polykleitos the elder, is a good 


1 Basile, 43. 2 Goodyear, in A.J. A., 1895, 1-12. 
8 Koldewey und Puchstein, 154. 
4 Olympia, II, 144-161. Cf. Wernicke, in Jhb., IX (1894), 101 ff. 


62 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


example. That of the statue of Nike (Vig. 35) by 
Paionios, exhibits a predilection for more graceful mould- 
ings during the latter half of the fifth century. Later 


£ 
Fic. 35. — Base of statue of Nike. Fic. 36. — Base of Roman statue. 


the mouldings became more complicated in form. During 
the Roman period the basal and crowning mouldings of 
such pedestals were frequently constructed from the 
same block as the central die (Fig. 56). 

2. WaAuus. — The forms of walls may be considered in 
respect to plan, profile or front elevation. Some walls 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 63 


were extremely irregular in plan. This was the case in the 
fortification walls of an acropolis, like that of Tiryns, 
where an irregular space was enclosed by a wall which fol- 
lows the natural conformation of the ground. Normally, 
however, walls were regular in plan. They were built 
in straight lines, squares, rectangles, polygons, circles or 
ellipses. Of these forms, the rectangle was preferred by 
the Greeks. Such was the form of the megaron of the 
Mycenaean palace, and the almost universal form of temples 
and of domestic buildings. Polygons, like that of the 
Tower of the Winds, are rare. ‘The circular disposition 
of walls was not avoided when useful, as in fortifica- 
tions, or agreeable, in other buildings. The beehive tombs 
of the Mycenaean period, the Choragic Monument of 
Lysicrates, the Tholos of Epidauros, the Philippeion of 
Olympia, are well-known examples of buildings with 
walls disposed on a circular plan. The South Wing of 
the Bouleuterion at Olympia! is a notable example of 
walls which follow the plan of an ellipse. In buildings 


which show great refinements of curvature it might be 


expected that some curvature in plan would be found. 
Burnouf? pointed out, in 1875, that the columns of the 
Parthenon were not set in straight lines, but on a slightly 
curved plan. The logical sequence to this is that the 
walls should also show curvature in plan. As a matter 
of fact, the long cella walls were not set in straight lines, 
but were bent in at the extremities. Boetticher? declares 
that this was done for economical purposes, to give relief 
to the parastades. Walls of slight curvature have been 


1 Olympia, Il, 77. For other examples, see Pfuhl in Ath. Mitt., XXX 
(1905), 360-374. 2 Rev. del Arch. quoted by Goodyear in Arch. FRec., 
VI (1897), 482. 8 Boetticher, 195. 


64 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


pointed out by Professor Goodyear in the case of the 
Maison Carrée at Nimes and in some Mediaeval and 
Renaissance Italian churches,! which appear to have de- 
rived this refinement from Byzantine sources. A wall of 
a tomb, apparently of the time of Augustus, built upon a 
wave-like plan, may be seen on the Appian Way. It 
may also be noted that the Greeks did not admire 
unbroken regularity, and that continuous walls without 
breaks appeared monotonous. Hence, fortification walls 
sometimes were provided with towers or bastions in places 
where they could serve no useful purpose, or walls were 
broken by vertical or horizontal retreats where they had 
only a decorative significance.2 Colonnettes and pilasters 
appear at an early period in the palace at Arne in Boeotia,® 
but were more common in later times. 

In elevation walls exhibit a variety of forms. They 
may be vertical, inclined, escarped, stepped, curved in 
profile, and with or without base and cornice. Vertical 
walls, being almost universal, need no special considera- 
tion. Terrace walls and fortification walls were some- 
times inclined for obvious reasons. But the inclination 
of walls towards or away from the centre of a building is 
a remarkable disposition found in some of the buildings of 
the classic period. In the case of the Parthenon, the side 
walls, although having nearly the same thickness above as 
below, incline towards the interior of the building. The 
tympana of the gables also lean inward. ‘The walls and an- 
tae of the Propylaia at Athens exhibit similar peculiarities.4 


1 Goodyear in Brooklyn Museum Memoir, Nos. 2 and 4; J.R.I. Br. 
Architects, 3d series, Vol. XV, No. 1. 

2 Doerpfeld, Beilage 24 ; Pernier, Mon. Ant., XIV (1904), 347, Fig. 13. 

3 A. de Ridder, in B.C. Fi XVIII (1894), 294. 4 Penrose, 38, 62. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 65 


% Escarpment, or the building of walls with an outward 
z slope at the base, is found in prehistoric and Mycenaean 


=e 2 it ee oe 


totes) Uae 


. _—————— 


Fic. 37.— Acropolis wall showing set-backs. Pergamon. 


: Troy, in the earliest walls of Athens and elsewhere. 
This form of wall was used in Egyptian fortresses and 
was intended to strengthen the walls at the point 

where they were likely to suffer most. It also had the 
effect of making missiles dropped from the top of the 

F 


a? 


66 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


wall ricochet into the face of an attacking party. But for 
some reason it did not appeal strongly to the builders of 
fortifications in Greece and in the historic period it was 
seldom employed. Walls which in elevation show a series 
of horizontal set-backs were far from rare. ‘This was not 
confined to terrace and city walls, ike those at Olympia, 
Pergamon (Fig. 37) and Pompeii, but walls of treasuries 
and temples, of stoae and other buildings, almost universally 
exhibited on the exterior a series of set-backs. ‘Thus the 
orthostatai were not flush with the socle but were set back, 
and the body of the wall was set back of the 
orthostatai. A noteworthy outgrowth of this 
practice may be seen in the apsidal wall of 
the Byzantine church at Olympia (Fig. 38). 
This form of wall presents the appearance of 
great stability and strength. 

We have already observed in the base of 
the so-called Tomb of Theron at Akragas an 
ete example of a wall surface with curved pro- 

sidal wall of file, and we are inclined to ask whether pul- 

Byzantine vinated walls, or walls with an entasis, do not 

church.  oecur sometimes in the case of peripteral 
buildings. Given a portico lined on one side with a row of 
columns all of whose shafts have curved profiles, would not 
a perfectly vertical or inclined wall produce a sharp con- 
trast which would invite softening by the introduction 
of a corresponding or a reverse curvature? If such an 
entasis ever occurred in the walls of a Greek portico, 
it must have been exceedingly rare; but later, in the 
Byzantine and Mediaeval periods, walls, towers and spires 
with an entasis were not uncommon.? 


Y 
WY 
WMA 


1 Goodyear, Arch. Rec., VII (1897), 63-96. 


a ae ae 
i ye 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 67 


A final modification in the forms of walls arose when 
they were given a base, body and capital. Sometimes 
utility dictated such forms, as when fortification walls 
of sun-dried brick were set upon continuous bases of 
stone and capped with variously formed battlements. 
The walls of Knidos,! although composed entirely of 
stone, have a base of tetragonal, and a body of polyg- 
onal, masonry and a rectangular crowning moulding. 
In fortification walls made entirely of stone, the base, as 
a visible form, was usually absent, but some kind of a cap 
or crown was regarded as a formal, 
if not a practical, necessity. 

Walls of temples and other build- 
ings were usually provided with both 
base and crown. The orthostatai were 
set off from the vertical face of the 
wall (Fig. 39), and, even when the 
entire wall was covered with stucco, 
formed a more or less visible base. 
In Ionic buildings, projecting mould- 
ings, analogous to column bases were 
carved beneath the orthostatai, still 
further emphasizing the base of the walls (Figs. 40, 41). 


Kia. 39.— Arsenal Wall 
at Peiraieus. 


_ This wall base, like that of the columns, was usually 


set upon a socle or plinth (ev@uvtnpia). Below this 
we sometimes find the crown of the stereobate left visible. 
Thus the toichobate became a complicated combination 
of simpler members, each one of which in more primitive | 
times served the same practical, or aesthetic, end. 

The epikranitis (émxpaviris), or wall crown, was usually 
present, especially in Doric buildings. It varied in form 


1 Texier, III, Pl. 160. 


Fae Naan Wye os 
pe a oe - 
es sedan ie le 


68 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


from a plain rectangular abacus moulding, as in the 
Treasury of the Megarians, or a plain beak moulding, 


ORONONOWONONOHONONK 
Pipe eee 


Fic. 40. — Wall of Treasury Fic. 41. — Wall of circular 
of Phocaeans, Delphi. building at the Marmo- 
ria, Delphi. 
as in the Temple of Zeus at Olympia (Fig. 42), to the 
rich mouldings which crowned the cella walls of Ionic 


a 


Fic. 42.— Wall crown from Fic. 43. — Wall crown of 
Temple of Zeus, Olympia. Erechtheion, Athens. 


buildings in classic as well as Hellenistic times. In the 
Temple of Athena Nike, the wall crown consisted of a 
painted platband broken into two fasciae and _ sur- 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 69 


mounted by a series of projecting mouldings. The 
wall crown of the Erechtheion (Fig. 43) was equatly 
emphatic with an elaborately carved neck and cornice 
moulding. 

The use of string courses, or projecting mouldings, to 
indicate on the exterior of buildings the position of the 
upper floors, or for no other purpose than pure decoration, 
is in accordance with the Greek spirit, although ancient 
examples may be few in number.! So striking and uni- 
versal, however, are these string courses in Central-Syrian 
architecture? and in Greek and Asiatic buildings of the 
present day as to make it highly probable that they were 
employed also by the ancient Greeks. 

3. PARASTADES OR ANTAE. — The projecting ends of 
walls were often used as columns to carry, or to assist in 
carrying, a superincumbent entablature. Their forms, 
therefore, were derived in part from wall and in part 
from column forms. Pilasters and engaged columns 
derived their forms from the same sources. 

These projecting wall ends frequently formed the side 
walls of a porch, and hence were known as mapaotdaées. 

In the Mycenaean period anta bases appear sometimes 
to have been flush with the wall (Fig. 44) and, therefore, 
had no formal value. In such cases the anta base was a 
mere terminus of the wall base. Sometimes it was given 
a slight projection (Fig. 45). What form may have been 
given to the body and capital of antae and pilasters in 
the Mycenaean period is, at present, a matter of mere 
conjecture. 

1 Z.g. Temple at Aizanoi, Lebas, Arch. As. Min., I, Pl. 23; Arsinoeion 


at Samothrace, Conze-Hauser-Niemann, I, Taf. 54. 
2H. C. Butler, 194, 238, 244, 260. 


70 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


A study of the plans of antae of the archaic period will 
show sometimes, as in the Heraion at Olympia (Fig. 46), 
a form approximating the Mycenaean type. Sometimes 
it was a cubical block projecting beyond the wall, as in the 
Enneastylos (the so-called Basilica) at Paestum (Hig. 47). 
Again, the form imitates a column, as in the case of 


bis 


Fic. 44.— Plan of Fig. 45.— Plan of Fia. 46.— Plan of 
Anta from Troy. Anta from Tiryns. Anta from the 
Heraion, Olympia. 


Temple D at Selinous (Fig. 48). But these forms, while 
they recognized the function of the anta as a support, did 
not express its character as a wall terminus. ‘The classic 
form occurs in the so-called Temple of Poseidon at Paestum 
(Fig. 49), and more thoroughly developed in the Temple 
of Zeus at Olympia (Fig. 50). In the latter instance, and 
in buildings of the classic period generally, the anta is 
considerably narrower on the side where it unites with the 
exterior of the cella wall. It also became more closely 
assimilated to the wall in construction and in decoration. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS rts 


In the Hellenistic period, we often find a reversion to the 
earler type. 
Anta bases derived their forms sometimes from the wall 


Rice 42 Plan of Fic. 48.— Plan of. Fie. 49.—Plan of 


Anta from the En- Anta from Temple Anta from Temple 
neastylos, Paestum. D, Selinous. of Poseidon, Paes- 
tum. 


bases, sometimes from those of the columns. Thus, the 
anta bases of the Enneastylos at Paestum have the form 
of a rectangular plinth, similar to that 
of the walls; those of the Temple of 
Zeus at Olympia have 
socles and orthostatai ; 
those of the Theseion ; 
Fig. 50.—Plan of (Fig. 52) have awave pyg. 51.—Plan of 


Anta from Temple moulding and taenia, Anta base from the 
of Zeus, Olympia: ‘ i in 
Siar while'those of the. io, Olympia 
Temple of Athena Nike (Fig. 53) and of the Erechtheion 


(Fig. 54) have mouldings and orthostatai similar to those 


1 Koldewey und Puchstein, 210, 


12 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


of the columns and of the walls. When the end of a wall 
and a colonnade occur in the same plane, as in the portal 


Fic. 52.— Anta base from the _ Fic. 53.— Anta base from the 
Theseion, Athens. Temple of Nike, Athens. 


of the Stadion at Olympia (Fig. 51) or in the peribolos of 
the Temple of Artemis at Kangovar,! a composite form 


Fic. 54.— Anta base from Fie. 55.—Anta capital 


the Erechtheion. from the Enneastylos, 
Paestum. 


resulted, a portion of which is of rectangular, and the 
remainder of circular, section. 
The body (o@ua) of the anta shows Aes the influence 


1 Texier, Arménie, I, Pl. 66. 


z. 


ae > ae gt eae ee! ee ee Te 
* . = 5 be ~ oe 


4 
:. 
* 
a 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS ta 


of both column and wall. Its structure has already re- 
ceived attention. The form shows columnar influence in 
having diminution and entasis. The body of the anta 
usually diminishes in width from base to summit so as to 
form a trapezoid with curved sides or entasis (€vtacis). 
In the archaic period, these characters were sometimes 
very strong, as in the case of the Enneastylos at Paestum, 


Fic. 56.— Anta capital from Fic. 57. —- Anta capital from 
Temple G, Selinous. the Propylaia, Athens. 


but in the classic period they were less strongly marked, 
and on the narrow side of the anta disappeared alto-- 
gether. 

The capitals of antae had characteristic forms, more or 
less similar to the crowning mouldings of walls. They 
may be considered as consisting of a neck (dé7rotpaynuor), 
a kymation (kuwatiov) and an abacus (aBa&). The neck 
would appear to be the least important member and, al- 
though its absence would hardly be felt, it was almost inva- 
riably present. Even in the archaic period the anta was 
crowned with a capital suggestive of a wall cornice. One 
of the earliest forms may be seen in the Enneastylos at 
Paestum (Fig. 55), which recalls the well-known form of 


T4 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the Egyptian cornice. Similar forms are found at Tegea! 
and upon Athenian. stelae.2 From this early type was 
evolved the characteristic Doric anta capital with its broad 
neck, its beak moulding and its abacus. Temple G at 
Selinous (Fig. 56) affords a typical example. Doric 
buildings of the fifth century, especially those under Attic 
influence, show semi-Ionic forms, examples of which may 
be seen in the Parthenon, the Athenian Propylaia (Fig. 
57) and the Temple of Poseidon at Sounion (Fig. 58). 


Fic. 58.— Anta capital from Fic. 59. — Anta capital from 


Temple of Poseidon, the Temple of Nike, Athens. — 
Sounion. 


The Ionic anta capital differed from the Doric in the 
richness of its superposed mouldings. Here the roundel, 
the cyma reversa and the ovolo play the principal 
roles. The anta capitals of Asia Minor sometimes show 
different forms for front and sides. Thus, at Priene,? 
the face of the anta shows a superposed series of roundel, 
cyma reversa, platband and ovolo, whereas the side 
exhibits only a small roundel and a high but shallow 


1 Ath. Mitt., VIII (1883), Taf. 14. _ 2 JShb., III (1888), 272-278. 
8 Priene, Figs. 64, 66. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 87, 


cavetto. The Temple of Athena Nike (Fig. 59) illustrates 
the theory of the mouldings of anta capitals. The affinity 


Fic. 60.— Anta capital from Fic. 61. — Anta capital from 
aa the Erechtheion. the Theatre at Epidauros. 


* of the anta with the walls is shown by the similarity of 
their mouldings, while their addition of an ovolo moulding 
links the anta also with the column. In the Erechtheion 
(Fig. 60), the unity of columns, antae and walls is carried a 
step farther and the ovolo moulding appears also in the 
ae crowning mouldings of the walls. In the portals of the 
theatre at Epidauros (Fig. 61), the 
a: necking is treated as the dominant 
factor of the capital. It was given 
the form of a cyma recta, above which 
the ovolo moulding appears as a part 
of the abacus. 

In these examples, the independ- 
os ence of the anta capital was preserved. 
RA They show no influence of the char- 
; acteristic spirals of the column capital. 
This step appears to have been taken eae Re Spe 

from the Temple o 

for the first time in, or shortly before, Apollo, Miletos. 


76 GREEK .ARCHITECTURE 


the Hellenistic period, in the pilaster capitals of the Temple 
of Apollo near Miletos (Fig. 62). In the Temple of Zeus 
at Aizanoi, the anta capitals are still more closely related 
to capitals of columns, as they exhibit the ovolo as well as 
lateral volutes. . 

4. Doors AND Winpbows. — The forms of doorways! 
(Ovpopata) were determined by material as well as by 
aesthetic demands. Crude and irregular openings occur 
in early and in unimportant walls. But regularity in wall 
construction necessitated regularity in the openings, In 
plan, these openings generally have their sides parallel and 
at right angles to the adjoining walls, but occasionally the 
openings are set at an angle, as at Oiniadai in Akarnania,? 
The tower windows of the defences of Herakleia near 
Miletos? show considerable variety in plan. Some are 
set at right angles to the wall, others pierce the wall at 
an angle. Some are splayed simply, others doubly 
splayed. 

In elevation, the form varies in accordance with the 
pose of the jambs and the method of crowning the open- 
ing. From very early days, door jambs (ora@yoi) were 
posed, sometimes vertically, sometimes at an inclination 
toward each other. Thus the jambs of the small northern 
doorway at Mycenae (Fig. 63) seem to have been set 
vertically.* This was doubtless a very general method 
for ordinary doors and windows. But inclined jambs also 
occur, especially in monumental constructions, throughout 


1 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Janua. 

2 Heuzey, Mont Olympe, 450, Pl. 16. 

3 De Rochas, 75. 

4 The slight inclination of 0.05 m. noted by Blouet, IIT, Pl. 65, may be 
disregarded. 


- 


Baa - -.: 


= 


"4 
Ey. 
x 
- 
* 

® 

3 


See VR Ste Ne hoe Ae Se ee 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS TT 


all periods. Occasionally the jambs were continued until 
they met and enclosed an opening of triangular form. 
An opening of this character is found in the north wall at 
Mycenae.! A later example of such a triangular doorway 
is found at Elaios in Aetolia (Fig. 64). But ordinarily, 
the inclined jambs were truncated by a lintel (i7épOupa), 
leaving the opening of trapezoidal form. This relieved 
the lintel without narrowing the lower or more useful 


Fic. 63. Fia. 64. Fic.65. —- Fa. 66. Fic. 67. 


Fig. 63.— Gateway at Mycenae. Fig. 64.—- Gateway of Elaios. Fig. 65.— 
Doorway of tomb at Orchomenos. Fig. 66.—Gateway at Oiniadai. 
Fig. 67.— Gateway at Oiniadai. 


portion of the opening. Doorways of trapezoidal form 
are a marked feature of Mycenaean architecture, as may 
be seen in the Lion Gate at Mycenae and in the tomb at 
Orchomenos (Fig. 65); they are found in temples and 
tombs of the archaic and classic period, and are rec- 
ognized by Vitruvius? as a characteristic feature of 
Ionic as well as of Doric architecture. The Hellenistic 
Greeks appear to have seen in this form a device 
for giving greater apparent height to doorways. When 
doorways were more than thirty feet in height, Vi- 
truvius directed that the opening be not trapezoidal but 
rectangular. Occasionally the inclined jambs were not 


1Schliemann, Myken., Fig. 20. 2 Vitruvius, IV, 6. 


78° GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


continuous but broken, as in one of the gateways at 
Oiniadai (Fig. 66). A very unusual form occurs in two 
of the gateways at Oiniadai (Fig. 67), where the jambs 
are inclined toward each other, not in straight lines, but 
in gentle curves. 

Many in number are the forms resulting from varia- 
tions in the method of crowning the opening. ‘The usual 


By. ( 
se 

i | 
li iL 


FiG. 68. Fic. 69. Fic. 70. BiG, 71; F1a. 72. 


Fig. 68.— Gateway at Messene. Fig. 69.— Gateway at Assos. Fig. 70.— 
Gateway at Phigaleia. Fig. 71.— Gateway at Oiniadai. Fig. 72. — 
Gateway at Assos. 


method consisted in the adoption of a lintel which closed 
the opening with a rectilinear and horizontal line. But 
the crown of the opening might be triangular, as at Mes- 
sene (Fig. 68) or trapezoidal, as at Assos (Hig. 69), or a 
jogged rectangle, as at Phigaleia (Fig. 70), or a round 
arch, as at Oiniadai (Fig. 71), or a pointed arch, as at 
Assos (Fig. 72). 

The forms of windows! (@upides) may be said to repeat 
in general the forms of doorways. In fortresses they 
were often narrow loopholes, as in the towers at Samo- 
thrace and at Andros. In private. houses, as may be 


1 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Fenestra. 


; 

: 
: 
i * 
, 
oY 
a 
oS 
rt 
1 
ve 
4 
z 
‘ 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 49 


judged from vase-paintings, they were nearly square, or 
long, rectangles divided by a central support. In temples 
the trapezoidal form was sometimes used, as in the west 
windows of the Erechtheion.! A very unusual, but an- 
cient,? form may be seen in the openings to the roof of 
the Temple of Concordia at Akragas (Fig. 73). 

5. PILLARS, COLUMNS AND PIERS.— We are accus- 
tomed to think of Greek architects as concerned with a 
single type of support, the column; 
but not infrequently they employed 
also tetragonal piers, composite pil- 
lars and supports of anthropomor- 
phic form. Each type presented spe- 
cial problems, which we may indicate 
while considering in detail the forms 
of their bases, shafts and capitals. 

The bases of piers do not differ y,4. 73.— Window from 
essentially from those of columns. Temple of Concordia, 
Thus the tetragonal shafts of the “*"8** 

Choragic Monument of Thrasyllos? are like the columns 
of the Doric type in having no independent. bases. 
The same is true of the octagonal piers in the Abaton 
at Epidauros.4 On the other hand, in the Temple of 
Athena Nike at Athens® and in the theatre at Epidauros,® 
the piers which divide the doorways have base mouldings 


1 The west windows are of Roman origin, but.the windows of the east 
wall were also trapezoidal. Stevens, A.J.A., X (1906), 47-71. 

2 Russell Sturgis (I, 157) is probably wrong in assigning these windows 
to the Middle Ages. 

8 Stuart and Reveit, II, Ch. 4, Pl. 3. 

4Cavvadias, Pl. 7, Fig..4; Lechat, 135, 

5 Gardner, 373. 

6 Cavvadias, Pl. 38 ; Lechat, 205. 


80 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


corresponding to those of the adjacent Ionic columns or 
engaged columns, and differ from them only in plan. 

The general forms of column bases (@acews) are redu- 
cible to those of tetragonal, polygonal and circular plan. 
The tetragonal plinth (7A iOos tetpdywvos), though in har- 
mony with the forms of the pier, was less appropriate as a 
base for columns. ‘That it may have been used for this 
purpose, however, especially for porches in antis, is sug- 
gested by the temple and fountain figured on the Fran- 
cois vase.t In such cases similarity of form in the bases 
of shafts and antae contributed somewhat to the general 
harmony. In the case of prostyle and peripteral porches, 
however, the tetragonal base was not only aesthetically 
less justifiable, but it blocked the passageways with its 


sharp angles, and its edges were easily fractured. The 


filling up of the intercolumnar spaces with similar plinths 
obviated this inconvenience. The tetragonal plinth, 
therefore, as a column base, did not survive except as a 
factor in some composite bases. 

Another method of adapting the rectangular plinth to 
closely spaced colonnades was to chamfer its angles, thus 
transforming the tetragonal into an octagonal plinth. 
This method may have been employed in some early 
buildings of Asia Minor. A later development of this 
type may be seen in the dodecagonal plinths oceurring in 
two of the bases from the Temple of Apollo near Miletos.? 

Bases of circular plan (o7eipat, tpoxidor) constitute 
the normal form for columns. ‘Their forms may be simple 
or composite. In Mycenaean buildings, we find low cylin- 
drical bases of simple form. <A similar base occurs in 


1 Mon. ined., IV, Taf. 54-55 ; Furtwingler und Reichhold, Taf. 11-12. 
2 Haussoullier, 70. 


Se ee 


oe 


ball ct ee er, oo eee PO 


he Se,” ea 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 81 


the Greek Temple at Pompeii (Fig. 74), and in connection 
with an independent Doric shaft found at Assos.! Here 
the base is the frustum of a cone of the form common in 
Egypt. In the Apollonion at Naukratis the cone in the 
upper half of a composite base receives unusual promi- 
nence (Fig. 75). ) 

The cylinder probably also occurred as a simple form in 
early Greek architecture. Such a base was published by 


Fic. 74. — Low Doric base 
from Greek Temple at. Fic. 75.— Base from 
Pompeii. Naukratis. 


Labrouste? for the shaft of a column in the porch of the 
so-called Temple of Demeter at Paestum. It occurs, also, 
decorated with palmettes and lotuses in the upper half of 
two bases from the Temple of Apollo near Miletos.? 

A torus, or convex moulding of semicircular or other 
curvilinear profile, constituted a third type. Egyptians 
and Asiatics found sharp edges and rectilinear profiles 
impractical and inharmonious, and substituted for them 
bases with rounded edges and curved profiles. Tradition 
and reason combined to commend this form to the Greeks. 


1Clarke, in A.J.A., II (1886), 267. 
2Labrouste, Pl. 12. 
3 Haussoullier, 68. 


82 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Convex bases of simple, and also of composite, form 
are represented on Mycenaean gems.! <A simple torus 
forms the base of an archaic column found at Kolum- 
dado (Fig. 76). 

The forms of convex base mouldings are by no means 


" Fic. 77.—Base from 
Fic. 76.— Base from archaic Temple of Ar- 
Kolumdado, Lesbos. temis, Ephesos. 


invariably the same. Sometimes, asin the archaic Temple 
of Artemis at Ephesos (Fig. 77), and in the Temple of 


Apollo at Phigaleia, curvature of the moulding is strongest: 


near the base, and is like an inverted 
echinus; again, as in the Smintheion 
and in the Temple at Teos (Fig. 78), 
the curve resembles a regular echinus 
and is strongest near the top; more 
frequently, asin the Erechtheion, the 


Fic. 78.— Base from the curve was semicircular in profile, and 
Temple of Dionysos, 
Teos. 

later architecture. . The cyma, or 


wave moulding, was used occasionally in columnar as 
well as in mural base mouldings. It occurs in one of the 
mouldings of the base of the Corinthian column at Phiga- 


1 Evans, in J.H.8., XXI (1901), Figs. 24, 38, 36, 40. 


in this form passed into Roman and 


Bets 
a 
si 
i, 
4 
F 
: 
; 
: 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 83 


leia,! and in an independent support found in the Temple 
of Dionysos Bresaios in the island of Lesbos (Fig. 79). It 
may have figured more prominently in the archaic period 
in Ionian Greece, and from this source 
have been carried eastward to Per- 
sepolis. 

Composite circular bases were, as we 
have already observed, represented on 
Mycenaean gems, and became later .. 79 — Base from 
much more common than the simple the Temple of Dio- 
forms. They fall into two classes, the YS Presale, Ce 
Asiatic-Ionie and the Attic-Ionic. The 
Asiatic-Ionic type consists of a torus set upon a truncated 
cone or cylinder called the trochilos (tpoytdos). The 
decoration and the complication of these forms by the 
addition of subsidiary mouldings need not concern us 
here. The trochilos was seldom left with a plane surface 
as in the Temple at Lokroi,2 but was formed with a 
concave profile so as to contrast with the convex torus. 
Here, consequently, was produced a strip of shadow which 
threw into stronger relief the rounded torus. On account 
of this form and function, the trochilos was known also as 
the scotia (oxotia). Many experiments were doubtless 
necessary before the form of this curve became fixed. In 
the Temple of Hera at Samos, the scotia was profiled to a 
shallow are of a circle. Stronger shadows were produced 
by doubling and deepening the scotia. A double scotia 
was carved in the bases of the archaic Temple of Artemis 
at Ephesos,* and continued to be popular in Asia Minor 


1Cockerell, Pl. 15. 2Petersen, in Rém. Mitt., V (1890), 187-188. 
3 Ion. Antiq., I, Ch. V, Pls. 3-5. 
Murray, in J.H.S., X (1889), 8; Hogarth, Pls. 3-4. 


+ 


PRIN iy ig Sagk RE)! eS Us Pago 
. Lee ire oF Pe a iy 
PT tte te eas 


84 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


in the fourth century. The deepening of the scotia also 
received attention. A typical example is found in the 
bases of the Temple of Athena at Priene (Fig. 80), where 


SR TS SR SG: 

Fig. 80. — Base from the Fic. 81.— Base from 
pronaos of the Temple of the Erechtheion, 
Athena, Priene. Athens. 


the curves are shallower toward the top and base of the 
trochilos and sharper near the middle. 

The Attic-Ionic base of the classic period consisted of 
an upper and lower torus separated 
by a scotia. Attic architects of the 
fifth century were seeking for a 
$j, »ormal type of base. Inthe Temple 
of Athena Nike, the scotia was dis- 
proportionately high and_ shallow. 
In the bases of the inner order of 
| the Propylaia, it was profiled to an 
Fia. 82. — Base rate inner ellipse (Fig. 81). The canonical 

order of the Propylaia, type appeared first in the Erech- 

eaiens: theion, where the scotia showed the 
curve of a two-centred arc.1 Mnesikles, in the Propylaia 
at Athens (Fig. 82), and Iktinos, in the Temple of Apollo 


Y 


Uy 
Y 


1Twanoff, I, Taf. 14. 


s 
ee : 

“5 
> eT ee ae 
Be ati ties hf 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 85 


at Phigaleia, seem to have felt that an additional plinth was 
required at the base. This they added, somewhat timidly. 


A base of considerable beauty is that 
of the Monument of Lysicrates, where 
the curves of the torus mouldings are 
especially noteworthy (Fig. 88). 
In the Hellenistic period, the forms 
of bases have less interesting profiles, 
and are likely to vary from the 
classic types. Thus, in the Temple 
of Dionysos at Pergamon, the base 

consisted of an in- 

verted cyma and 

torus upon a 


UL 


Fie. 83.—Base from 
Choragic Monument of 
Lysicrates, Athens. 


Hig. 84. — Base from the 
Temple of Dionysos, 


Pergamon. 


plinth (Fig. 84); in the Leonidaion at 


Olympia, the lower torus was omitted 
and the plinth became a_ pedestal 
with base and crown mouldings (Fig. 
85). The Romans made frequent 
use of the Attic- 
Ionic base and 
placed beneath it 


a plinth or pedestal. 

The shaft or body (cdma, cavriov) 
of a support is the portion compre- 
hended between its base and capital. 
Its form may be, as we have already 
indicated, tetragonal or polygonal, 
cylindrical, composite or anthropo- 
morphic. ‘Tetragonal, free-standing 


Fic. 85.— Base from the 
Leonidaion, Olympia. 


supports, of immemorial antiquity in Egypt, occur also 
in Greece. In monuments of the classic period, as in 


86 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the Temple of Athena Nike, or in the Choragic Monu- 
ment of Thrasyllos at Athens, or in the Propylaia at 
Priene, they show refinements of form derived from 
the column. Octagonal shafts appear to have been em- 
ployed at Bolymnos, at Troizen, at Epidauros and at 
Delos, and show at least one columnar character, that of 
diminution. Cylindrical, or more accurately, slender, | 
truncated conical shafts constitute by far the largest class, 
as would naturally be the case in any country where the 
earliest shafts were made of wood. Various applications 
of the column, however, called for a modification of the 
cylindrical form, as, for example, in colonnades, where 
the intercolumniations were partially filled in with balus- 
trades, or in the proskenia of theatres, where the inter- 
columniations were filled with pinakes. In such cases, 
the shafts were either oblong in plan with rounded ends, 
as in the Stoa at Pergamon,! or of a composite type, as 
in the theatre at Oropos.? 

Anthropomorphic shafts. (cavnddpot, capvadrides, Képat, 
aTNavTEs, TEeAawoves), Of which we have an archaic type in 
the Treasury of the Knidians at Delphi,? and a classic ex- 
ample in the Porch of the Maidens of the Erechtheion, do 
not call for special remark. In these cases, the entire fig- 
ure, including the head, was treated as the shaft. Above — 
the head is the crown or capital. Atlantes or Telamones, 
sculptured in relief, occur in the Olympieion at Akragas.* 

Three formal modifications of cylindrical shafts call for 
special mention: their diminution, entasis and apophyge. 


1 Pergamon, II, 62. 2 Doerpfeld und Reisch, 104, 

3 See Fig. 221. The Treasury of the Siphnians at Delphi had similar 
shafts. Perrot et Chipiez, VIII, 390, Pl. 8. 

4 Koldewey und Puchstein, Figs. 141, 148. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 87 


By the diminution of a shaft is understood its decrease 
in diameter from one end to the other. It has been almost 
the universal practice for architects from time immemorial 
to the present day to provide columns with diameters 
greater at the base than at the summit. This tapering 
from base to summit is analogous to the 
natural tapering of wooden shafts. It also 
breaks the mechanical effect produced by 
a perfect cylinder and increases the apparent 
stability of a column. In the Mycenaean 
period, columns were made of wood, and 
have long since disappeared. At Tiryns, 
however, the small diameter of the column 
bases as compared with the wide architraves, 
and at Mycenae the contemporary relief 
representations of columns in the Lions’ 
Gate and on the facades of the two principal 
tholoi, have led archaeologists to believe that 
Mycenaean shafts diminished from summit 
to base (Fig. 86). Pictorial and ‘sculptural 
evidence from Crete! and Attica? sometimes | 
indicate the same peculiarity. In free- me. 96.—shatt 
standing columns, however, sucha diminution in relief from 
: ‘ : Lions’ Gate, 
is found neither as a precedent in Egyptian,  jpycenae. 
nor as a survival in Greek, architecture, and 

has not been conclusively established even as a general 
characteristic of Mycenaean architecture.? In the archaic 
period, Doric shafts show a strong diminution from base to 
summit (Fig. 87). The columns thus acquired apparent 


1 Evans, in J.H.S., XXI (1901), 1938. 
2 Perrot et Chipiez, VI, Figs. 202, 208. 
8 Durm, Jhb. Oest. Arch. Inst., X (1907), 41-84, 


PSS eo Nene 
» Tee 


88 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


stability in the same manner as did the walls. In the 
classic and Hellenistic periods, other ideals prevailed and 
both Doric and Ionic shafts were less conical and more 
cylindrical in form (Fig. 88). According to Vitruvius,! 


Fic. 87. — Shaft from Fig. 88. — Shaft from 


Tavola dei Pala- the Propylaia, 
dini, Metapontum. Athens. 


the diminution of shafts varied inversely with their height, 


high shafts requiring less diminution than low ones. 

The second modification of the Greek shaft was its en- 
tasis (€vracis). By this is meant that the vertical out- 
lines of the shaft were pulled in at the extremities, so as 
to form curved profiles. In a very few instances, as in the 
Temple of Apollo at Phigaleia,? and in the Temple of 
Athena Nike at Athens, the shafts appear to be devoid of 
entasis,? but in general, Greek shafts had curved profiles. 


1 Vitruvius, ITI, 3, 12. 2 Cockerell, 49. 3 Penrose, 107. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 89 


Sometimes, as in the Enneastylos and the so-called Temple 
of Demeter at Paestum, the curve was very pronounced ; 
again, as in the Temple of Apollo near Miletos,! it was 
confined to the upper two-thirds of the shaft. It was ex- 
tremely delicate in some archaic examples like the Temple 
of Apollo at Corinth, as well as in classic buildings like the 
Parthenon and Erechtheion. ‘Tallshafts requireda greater 
amount of entasis than short ones, and smooth shafts more 
than those of rough surface. The nature of the curve has 
been shown by Penrose? to be the hyperbola, applied, 
however, in various ways. In the Parthenon, the vertex 
of the curve falls below the stylobate ; hence the profile of 
the shaft exhibits a curve corresponding to one arm of a 
hyperbola. In the Propylaia, in the Erechtheion and in 
classic and post-classic buildings in general, the vertex of 
the curve occurs above the hase of the column; hence a 
similar curvature is found above and below the vertex. 
This symmetrical character in the curve of the entasis was 
emphasized by Roman and Renaissance architects, and 
thereby much of the charm of the curved profile was lost. 
In order to secure this delicate curve in the profile of the 
shaft, a full-sized mould or templet was probably necessary. 
What led the Greeks to this refinement is not obvious. 
Possibly it was to correct an optical effect. Heliodorus 
_ Damianus of Larissa? declared that a cylindrical column 
__ would appear to be concave and therefore must be made 
convex. Possibly the convex form passed over into stone 
architecture from a primitive reed-bundle column,’ which 
would exhibit a similarly curved outline produced by 
superincumbent pressure. As a geometrical form, with- 


1 Haussoullier, 75. 3 De Opticis, XIV. 
2 Penrose, 40. 4 A.J.A., VI (1890), 52. 


90 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


out any indication of its origin, it occurs in the earliest 

period, as, for example, in the shaft of the stone candela- 

brum found in the Megaron at Phaestos,! also in represen- 

tations of shafts on a Mycenaean cylinder.? In the archaic 

period, if not earlier, it entered into Greek architecture as 
a characteristic feature of the shaft. 

The third modification of the shaft was its apophyge 

or apothesis (azroguyy, amddvots, amoleots), and astragal 

(actpayados). The apophyge, a short. 

but sharply curved expansion of the shaft © 

at its extremities, served to break the 

contrast between the vertical line of the 

shaft and the horizontal line of its base 


or capital (Fig. 89). The astragal, con- — 


sisting of a fillet or roundel, emphasized 
Fig. 89.—Apophyge the extremities of the shaft and aided 
on shaft from the the apophyge in its transitional function. 
pies i of Nike, ‘These characters seem to have originated 
with the Ionian Greeks and were applied 
by them not only to shafts of columns, but also to walls, 
friezes and even to the abaci of capitals. They are found, 
perhaps as Achaean survivals, at the extremity of the shafts 
of the Enneastylos and the so-called Temple of Demeter 
at Paestum. In Doric columns of the best period they — 
were usually. absent, but reappear in some columns of 
the Hellenistic period. In some cases, as in the three- 
quarter columns in the Temple of Apollo at Phigaleia, 
the apophyge was very exaggerated (Fig. 90). Ordinarily 
it was so delicate as not to attract attention. The curve 
was ordinarily a hyperbola. 


1 Mon. Ant., XIII (1908), 14. 
2 JS, S&L AOI. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 91 


The capital (émixpavov, xeparis, Kidxpavov, Kepaddatov), 
or crowning member of the pier or column, consisted of 
three parts; aneck, a principal moulding and a plinth or 
abacus. . : 

The neck (tpayndo0s or tpayndcov was probably the 
earlier, b7rotpayndwov the later designation) was nearest 


Fia. 90.— Apophyge Fie. 91.—Concave 
on shafts from the necking on capital, Fic. 92.— Convex 
Temple of Apollo, from Temple _ OD, necking on capital, 
Phigaleia. : Selinous. from Neandreia. 


the shaft, and in some cases, as at Naukratis 1! and Lokroi,? 
treated as belonging to the shaft rather than to the capital. 
In most cases it formed a part of the capital block. It 
occurs at Mycenae as a concave moulding sharply dis- 
tinguished from the principal member of the capital and 
also from the cylindrical shaft. A concave necking reap- 
pears in many archaic capitals at Paestum and Selous 
(Fig. 91). Convex neckings, common in the repeated 
roundels in capitals from Assyria, Asia Minor and Etruria, 
appear also in capitals represented on Mycenaean ivories,? 
and in the archaic capital from Neandreia (Fig. 92). The 
kymation or echinus of the Ionic capital and the annul 


1 Petrie, Naukratis, I, Pl. 3. 
2 Petersen, in Rim. Mitt., V (1890), 192-193, 
8 Perrot et Chipiez, VI, Figs. 202, 204. 


92 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


of the Doric echinus are such neckings absorbed into 


the body of the capital. 
nor convex, occurs in the capitals of the 
Erechtheion (Fig. 93). The neck of 
the capital disappeared during the classic 
period, probably because it weakened the 
appearance of strength required for the 
support of the entablature. In the Hel- 
lenistic period it reappeared and became 
in the Vitruvian orders an important part 


Fire. 93.— Plat- 
band necking on 


A platband, neither concave 


capital from the Of the capital. 

Sreaineln The principal moulding of the capital 
received a variety of forms, the plans of which were 
rectangular, circular, composite or miscellaneous. 


Rectangular blocks 
served as capitals for 
polygonal shafts in the 
porches of Egyptian 
tombs at  Benihassan. 
Two or three such blocks 
superposed would seem 
to have supphed the gen- 
eral masses of the Greek 
capital.’ Square, or 
polygonal, shafts were 
given square, or polyg- 
onal, capitals.2 Rectan- 


Fic. 94. — Archaic capital from Delos. 


gular blocks were also used to crown columns, so as to make 
the transition to the rectangular entablature less abrupt. 
The essential rectangularity of the Ionic capital is most 


1 Hittorff et Zanth, 334-342, Pl. 82. 
2 Borrmann, Jhb., III, 269, Figs. 2, 5, 8. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 93 


evident in an archaic example from Delos (Fig. 94), in 
which a single rectangular block has been but slightly 
modified in form. In an archaic capital from Athens! 
the principal moulding, or body of the capital, retains in 
great measure the rectangular form on the front and back, 
but on the sides 
assumes a cylin- 
drical form with 
slightly raised 
edges (Fig. 95). 
The face of the 
normal Ionic cap- 
ital was somewhat 
complicated, as it 
was fashioned 
from a rectangu- 
lar block applied, 
not directly to the 
cylindrical shaft, 
but to a_ shaft 
capped by a large : 
ring moulding. Fia. 95. — Archaic capital from Athens. 
This ring mould- 

ing, which in Oriental examples decorated the shaft, 
in Ionic architecture was absorbed into the capital, and is 
known as the echinus of the capital. In some archaic 
examples it was undercut like a beak moulding (Fig. 96), 
but in the fully developed capital it had an elliptical or 
quarter round profile, and was carved with the egg and dart 
ornament. Its position, which in archaic times was near the 
shaft, was gradually raised, until, in the Hellenistic period, 


1 Perrot et Chipiez, VII, Pl. 538, 4. 


94 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


it was set above the level of the centre of the spirals. Thus 
the Ionic capital seems to be a fusion of two elements, an 
annular moulding or echinus, and a quadrangular block.! 
At Phigaleia, Epidauros, and at Palatitza,? capitals of 
engaged columns show the spiral motive applied to the 
three sides of the capital, and at Pompeii? free standing 
columns = exhibit 
the spiral motive 
on four sides of 
the capital. In 
all cases we per- 
ceive a more or 
less strongly 


an original rec- 
tangular _block.4 
This ‘rectangular- 
ity of the Ionic 
capital made its 
application  diffi- 
cult in the case. of 
buildings with peristyles, especially if of circular plan. 
The unusual form of capital found at Neandreia® in the 
Troad, and at Kolumdado® in Lesbos, are exceptional ex- 
amples, in which rectangularity is to be recognized in the 
plan rather than in the face of the capital. 

The form of the pulvinus on the side of the Ionic 


Fic. 96. — Archaic capital from Athens. 


1A.J.A., IV (1888), 43. 2 Heuzey, Pl. 10. 8 Mau, Fig. 239. 

4 In the capitals from the south entrance of the Palaistra at Olympia 
(Fig. 228) the spirals spring from the centre of the capital block and 
are developed diagonally. This form may be described as transitional 
between a capital of rectangular and one of circular type. 

5 Clarke, in A.J.A., II (1886), 3. 6 Koldewey, Taf. 16. 


marked trace of. 


r 
‘ 
% 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 95 


capital also taxed the ingenuity of the architects. In 
Lycia, in Etruria and in the column of the Naxians at 
Bs. Delphi, as well as in the examples cited from Delos and 
« Athens, the form of the pulvinus preserved a cylindrical 


ag Hig. 97.—Pulvinus of Fic. 98.— Pulvinus of cap- 
a archaic capital from ital from the Temple of 
Bs Athens. Athena, Priene. 


Be aspect. But at Athens archaic examples are found in 
a which the pulvinus was given a concave profile, in form 
resembling a spool (Fig. 97). This form was further 
modified by the balteus (decpos or Ev), a band, or girdle, 


: Fie. 99.— Pulvinus of capital Fic. 100.— Pulvinus of cap- 

ae from the Temple of Apollo, ital from the Palaistra, 

2 Miletos. Olympia. 

- which seemed to compress the centre of the pulvinus, as 
e.: at Priene (Fig. 98), and sometimes had on either side 
3 curves of double curvature, as at Miletos (Fig. 99). Oc- 
a. casionally, as in the Palaistra at Olympia! (Fig. 100), 


the side of the capital lost its bolster shape and resembled 
1 Olympia, TI, Taf. 74. 


96 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


flowers interlocked by their stems. At this stage of 
development the form was certainly far removed from that 
of a rectangular block. 

A second solution for the principal moulding of the 
capital was to construct it on a circular plan. Instead of 
a rectangular block, a cylindrical drum was selected as a 


—_ = ta 


Fig. 101. — Echinus capital Fic. 102.— Conical capital 
from the Heraion, Samos. from the Heraion, 
Olympia. 


starting-point, and many types of capitals arose from a 
modification of its form. By rounding off its sharp edges 
the slightly rounded profile of the torus capital of the 
Tomb of Atreus at Mycenae was produced. An echinus 
appears to have served as the principal moulding of the 


capitals at the 


' Heraion at 
; Samos (Fig, 
Fic. 103. — Echinus of capital from the 
Temple of Poseidon, Paestum. 


: 101), and _ be- 
' came an essen- 
' tial part of the 
normal Ionic 
capital. The 
frustum of a cone furnished also an appropriate capital. 
Hellenistic capitals were frequently of this form (Fig. 102). 
In the normal Doric capital the cone was given a convex 
profile. The echinus of the capitals of the so-called 
Temple of Poseidon at Paestum appears to have been 
constructed of three arcs of circles (Fig. 103); that of 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 97 


the Theseion, of five arcs of circles and a straight line.! 
The parabola furnished the form for the earlier capitals 
at Corinth? and at Metapontum, and the hyperbola was 
employed at Aegina and elsewhere. Penrose® finds in 


: 


Fie. 104. — Echinus of capital from Parthenon. 


“ the profiles of the echinus of the Parthenon capitals a 
% succession of curves of three different kinds (Fig. 104), 
but such superfine prod- 
ucts of curvature were 
by no means universal 
and led to the abandon- 
ment of curved _ for 
straight profiles. The 


concave profile, like that T Vee ee 
. Egypt, was introduced 


of the calyx capitals of 
=f AES hE RENN DY Se NOOR A | 


also into Greek archi- 


TH 


tecture in the classic pe- Fic. 105.—Bell-shaped capital from 
; riod, in the Corinthian Tower of the Winds, Athens. 

. capital at Phigaleia* and in the Tholos at Epidauros.® 
At a later period this general form was employed in the 
: Olympieion, the Theatre of Dionysos, and the Tower of 
bs 1 Reinhardt, 8-9. 2 Cockerell, 91. 3 Penrose, 48. 

; 4 See Fig. 257. 5 See Fig. 258. 


H 


98 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the Winds at Athens, in the Gymnasium Gate at Olympia, 
and in the Stoa of Eumenes at Pergamon.! The profile 
of such capitals was usually slightly convex at the base, 
thus suggesting the cyma recta (Fig. 105). A marked 


Fic. -107.— Cyma recta moulding 


Fig. 106.— Cyma recta moulding on on capital from the Temple of 
votive column, Athens. Dionysos, Pergamon. 


cyma recta appears as the principal moulding in the 
capital of an archaic votive column from the Acropolis 
at Athens (Fig. 106). It occurs not infrequently at a 
~ late period, as, for ex- 
ample, in the Temple 
of Dionysos (Fig. 107) 
and in the Greek gym- 
nasium at Pergamon, 
at Magnesia on the 
Maeander, and in the 
Leonidaion, Olympia. 
The uppermost mem- 
ber of the capital, the 
abacus (aBa&, mdivOos), 
‘ might, in the case of 
Fre. 108.— Plan of abacus of corner col- isolated’ columns, be in 
umn, Erechtheion. plan round or square or 
polygonal, according to the nature of the capital, of 
which it was the crown; but when used for columns 


1 Pergamon, II, Taf. 24. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 99 


which supported entablatures, it received a rectangular 
plan. This form was modified in the case of a corner 
Tonic capital. In order to cover the diagonally posed 
corner volute, it took at the 
angles a slightly scalloped 
form (Fig. 108). When all 
four volutes were diago- 
nally posed, as was the case 
with some Jonic and all 
Corinthian capitals, the scal- 
loped abacus became the 
normal form (Fig. 109). 
In profile, the abacus re- 
ceived various forms. A 
rectilinear outline prevailed 
in the Doric abacus (Fig. 
110), but curvilinear profiles were preferred for the Ionic. 
An elliptical or hyperbolic outline, like the Doric echinus, 
is found in the Erechtheion (Fig. 111), the Propylaia and 


| Fig. 111. — Abacus of the Erech- 


Fic. 110. — Abacus of the Parthenon. theion. 


Fig. 109.— Plan of abacus of Monu- 
ment of Lysicrates, Athens. 


in other Ionic capitals of the classic period ; a cyma reversa 
was preferred in Asia Minor at the Mausoleion at Halikar- 


Fie. 112. — Abacus of the Mauso- Fig. 113. — Abacus of Monument 
leion at Halikarnassos. _ of Lysicrates, Athens. 


nassos (Fig. 112), in the Temple of Athena at Priene 
and elsewhere. The cavetto occurs frequently, as in the 


100 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


abaci of the Monument of Lysicrates (Fig. 113) and the 
Olympieion at Athens (Fig. 114), and in the Leonidaion 
at Olympia (Fig. 115). In some pilaster capitals from 

Cyprus the abacus derives its 
ae form from Ionic or Persian 

epistyles and is divided into 
Fig, 114. — Abacus of the Olym- g series of horizontal steps or 

pieion, Athens. fasciae. 

We have thus far considered the varieties of capitals 
of simple form. ‘These offered abundant choice for all 
ordinary purposes. Complex forms of capitals, however, 
were sometimes preferred. Thus, in the Temple of Apollo 
at Neandreia! is found a capital which resembles the 
superposed capitals from Egypt and Persepolis. The 
superposition of one form upon another produced also 
the capitals which crown the heads of the Caryatids of 
the Treasury of the Knidians 
at Delphi.* In fact, the normal 
Ionic capital itself was not a 
simple, but a complex, form. 
The superposition of the rec- 
tangular block with its lateral 
volutes upon a circular echinus Fic. 115.— Abacus of the Leon:- 
was not always a happy com- et oe ae 
bination. Beneath the pulvinus the echinus had to be 
flattened or omitted; on the other hand, sometimes the 
volutes suffered from the combination. ‘The juncture 
of echinus and volutes left an awkward corner which 
was covered by a half palmette. Ingenious as was this 
combination of forms it was too complex to appeal strongly 
to the practical minded Romans. 


1 Koldewey, in Winckelmannsprogramme, No. 51, 84. 2 See Fig. 221. 


ee ee ee eS ee Ee ee 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 101 


The application of the Ionic type of capital to peristyles, 
to which it was ill adapted, gave rise to new complex 
forms. Various cases arose, each of which presented 
peculiar difficulties. Temples, or other rectangular build- 


- ings surrounded by a peristyle, required a modification of 


the corner capitals so that the volutes might appear on ad- 
joining, instead of on opposite, sides of the capital. In 
Ionia and in Greece this was usually accomplished by 
twisting the corner volutes into a diagonal position. In 
Macedonia, Sicily and in southern Italy, the pulvinus 
was often omitted and a four-faced capital formed with 
all the volutes posed diagonally. 

In the case of circular buildings with peristyles we 
might expect that the forms of capitals would be modified 
to a somewhat trapezoidal shape. ‘This, however, appears 
not to have been the case with the Philippeion at Olympia. 

A new problem was presented when the peristiyle extended 
around an open court, as in market-places and private 
houses. Here, when the Ionic order is used, juxtaposed 
volutes form a reéntrant, not an external, angle. As this 
presented a form not altogether agreeable, we may well un- 
derstand that the circular types of capitals were preferred 
for such courts, or that the awkward angle was avoided 
by the use of the square pillar with a rectangular capital. 

Clustered columns with corresponding capitals were rare, 
although, in the case of antae, the half column and square 
pier were not infrequently combined. In the Pergamon 
Museum at Berlin there is an interesting triplex Doric 
capital which crowned a clustered shaft. The principal 
opening of the colonnade in front of the Temple of Isis at 
Pompeii! was between two massive piers with lateral at- 


1 Mau, Fig. 74. 


102 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


tached columns. The capitals of such complex piers .had 
complex capitals. In the long Stoa, or Macellum, at Delos! 
there are columns of which one side is channelled and the 
other plain. ‘The channelled sides have echinus capitals, 
while the capitals of the plain sides consist of the mpo- 
tonai of bulls. Ina private house at Delos, near the the- 
atre,2 two busts of lions as well as two busts of bulls 
crown shafts, the opposite sides of which are channelled 
and probably had echinus capitals. 

A logical evolution led to the substitution of human, 
for geometric, floral.and animal forms in the capitals of 
columns. ‘This stage was reached in the capitals from the 
fagade of the Temple of the Didymaean Apollo near 
Miletos,? where heads of Zeus and Apollo, probably also 
of Hera and Artemis, assume the position usually occupied 
by spirals. | 

6. ENTABLATURES. — The entablature (é78orH) usu- 
ally consisted of three parts, epistyle, frieze and geison 
or cornice. 

The epistyle (émvctvAvov) was the beam, or series of 
beams, which rested upon and united a row of columns, and 
which originally supported the ceiling beams. Its gen- 
eral form was that of a parallelopipedon, the long surfaces 
of which fall in horizontal and vertical planes. In the 


more refined buildings of the classic period these surfaces — 


were sometimes intentionally modified in form. ‘Thus, in 
the Parthenon, the upper and lower surfaces were curved in 
a vertical plane to harmonize with the upward curvature 
of the stylobate. In the Temple of Poseidon at Paestum, 
however, we find a different modification. Here the face 


1 Blouet, III, Pl. 8; B.C.H., VII (1884), Pl. 17. 
2 B.C. H., XIX (1895), 504-505, 8 Haussoullier, Pls. 7, 8, 9, 16. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 103 


of the epistyle was curved outward, as was the case in 
the Temple of Medinet Habu in Egypt.! In the Temple 
of Herakles at Cori,? the epistyle was curved inward in 
plan. In general, however, it was in form a regular 
parallelopipedon. 

The epistyle received other modifications of form, 
chiefly as an inheritance from methods of construction in 
wood. ‘These may be considered separately according to 
their appearance upon the front, rear or soffit of the 
epistyle. ‘The face of the epistyle, when representing 
colossal wooden beams, presented an unbroken face, except 
at the top, where it was crowned by one or more mould- 
ings. Doric epistyles usually, and Ionic epistyles oc- 
casionally, as in the exterior order of the Temple on the 
Ilissos,? presented. an unbroken face. But Ionic epi- 
styles were generally banded or broken into a succession 
of three overlapping fasciae. Occasionally, as in the 
Philippeion at Olympia, the epistyle showed only two 
fasciae. At Suwéda, in Syria,* the inner face of the 
epistyle of the pre-Roman temple has four fasciae. 
These banded epistyles suggest the superposition of 
smaller beams where the stronger unit was either difficult 
to obtain or not wanted. The crowning moulding was 
originally not a mere ornament but served a_ useful 
purpose. In wooden buildings it was probably, as Perrot® 
has suggested, a board designed to bind together the 
separate members of the epistyle and frieze, and to pre- 
vent disaster in case of warping of the principal beams. | 


1Pennethorne, Pt. 3, Pl. 1; Goodyear, in A.J. A., X (1895), 10. 

2 Goodyear, Arch. Rec., XXI (1907), 400. 

® Stuart and Revett, I, Ch. 2. Pls. 1-6. 

4 Butler, 331. 5 Perrot et Chipiez, VI, 712. 


104 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


In the Old Temple of Athena at Athens it projected above 
the upper level of theepistyle block, as if it were also 
required to prevent the triglyphs from sliding forward 
(Fig. 116). 

The form of the moulding which crowns the epistyle 
varied considerably. In rigidly Doric buildings it showed 


ea 


Fig. 116.— Crowning Fic. 117.—Crowning Fia. 118. — Crowning 


Moulding of Epistyle, Moulding of Epistyle, Moulding of Epistyle 
Old Temple of Athena, Temple C, Selinous. of Temple of Concor- 
Athens. dia, Akragas. 


a rectangular profile and was known as the taenia (Travia) 
or fillet-shaped moulding. Of similar rectangular form 
were the regulae or reglets (xavoves), 


DA Skin nd wih 
faeas 


apparently held in place by large 

wooden trunnels (youdor, 7Aov), from 

their resemblance to rain drops known 

Y to the Romans as guttae. sie trunnels 

Kid) 119.4 Geawning oO varied in form. In Temple C at 
Moulding of Epistyle, Selinous they are detached from the 
PTOny sate, hens) background, incline forwards, and 
taper downwards (Fig. 117). Usually, however, they are 
attached to the background and in form are either cylin- 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 105 


drical (Fig. 118) or taper upwards, sometimes with a 
curved profile (Fig.119). The taenia moulding occasionally 
appears in a modified form, asin the Temple C, Selinous,! 
and the Treasury of Syracuse at Olympia,” where it has a 
roundel moulding imbedded in it. Even in an archaic 
Doric building, like the so-called Temple of Demeter at 
Paestum,® the epistyle may be crowned with curved 
mouldings. Here, on the outer face, the epistyle was 
crowned with a cyma reversa between a bead moulding 
and a fillet, and on the inner face with an ovolo between 
bead and fillet. In late Doric buildings, such as the Tem- 
ple of Dionysos at Pergamon,’ curved mouldings need not 


Fig. 120.— Crowning Fie. 121.— Crowning Fia. 122. — Crowning 
Moulding of Epistyle Moulding of Epistyle Moulding of Epistyle 
of Temple of Nike, of Tholos at Epi- of the Temple of Ar- 
Athens. dauros. temis, Magnesia. 


surprise us. In this case the epistyle was crowned by a 
rectangular taenia, or abacus moulding, beneath which the 
regulae have the curved form of acyma reversa. In Ionic 
buildings, curved mouldings, as a rule, crown the epistyle. 
Here we find convex and concave mouldings, or the cyma 
reversa, terminated by bead or fillet mouldings (Figs. 
120-122). In Ionic epistyles of the classic period multiple 


1 See Fig. 117. 3 Koldewey und Puchstein, 19. 
2 Olympia, I, Taf. 34. 4Bohn, Temp. Dion. Perg., 6-7. 


106 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


mouldings already appear. In later buildings, simple 
mouldings were occasionally employed, as in the bead and 
ovolo of the Temple of Athena at Priene; but in general 
these mouldings were not only strikingly decorated, but 
complex inform. In Roman and Early Christian archi- 
tecture they sometimes absorbed the entire face of the 
architrave and all the trace of a massive beam or even of 
a banded epistyle disappeared.! 

The antithema (avt/@nua), or rear of the epistyle, was 
not a replica of the outer face. In Doric buildings the 
massive epistyle usually retained the same height as in 
the outer face, and was combined with the antithema 


of the frieze so as to present the appearance of a low 


wall rather than an entablature. In the case of the 
Parthenon,? the antithema of the frieze was set back, thus 
giving the epistyle a slight salience, but in the Temple of 
Zeus at Olympia,’ the frieze was flush with the epistyle, 


and the wall-like appearance emphasized.. At Sounion, 


Fic. 123. — Antithema of Epistyle, Temple of Demeter, Paestum. 


Rhamnous and elsewhere, the epistyle and frieze were sep- 


arated from each other by mouldings, and thus the inner 
face was more or less a reflection of the exterior. The 
separating mouldings, for the sake of variety, and perhaps 


1 Butler, 39. 2 Penrose, Pl. 16. 3 Olympia, I, Taf. 11. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 107 


SSSSASSSSSSS 


owing to the different conditions in regard to light, were 
rectly upon the inner block of the epistyle, which did not 
antithema of the epistyle y _ 
fasciae, instead of three. Fic. 124.—‘Antithema of Epistyle 
far in the Olympieion at Athens (Fig. 124) that the com- 
The under surface or soffit of the epistyle was, in the 
when the epistyle was constructed of two or three juxta- 
Do frequently panelled. At the 
Magnesia and the Temple of 
from the Temple of Artemis, Mag- 1255; where the epistyles 
the attention from the joints. The main object of the panel- 


given profiles different from those of the exterior (Fig. 
123). In Ionic buildings the ceiling beams rested di- 
reach the same height as . 
the exterior block. The SO 1) 7] A 
was accordingly formed so C 
as to present two bands, or 
The process Bf diminishing from the Olympieion, Athens. - 
the height of the epistyle on its reverse face was carried so 
bined frieze and epistyle of the inner face equalled in 
height the epistyle alone of the exterior. 
earlier and simpler varieties of Greek architecture, a 
plane surface. It remained so in Greece proper even 
posed blocks. In the architecture of Asia Minor, however, 
Shea? the soffit of the epistyle was 
| | Temple of Athena at Priene, 
| the Temple of Artemis at 
Fic. 125.— Antithema of Epistyle Apollo near Miletos (Fig. 
nesia. : 
consisted of two juxtaposed 
blocks, the panelling was effected in such a way as to divert 
ling, however, was to bring these broad surfaces into closer 
harmony with the coffered ceilings. Consequently, in the 


108 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Temple at Messa,! the panelling seems to have been in- 
troduced without regard to the intervening joint, and in 
the Olympieion at Athens,? was sunk in the middle 
block regardless of the joints on either side. Once estab- 
lished, this form of epistyle soffit survived in Orient and 
Occident alike. Similar panellings were sunk in the 
soffits of archivolts, in spite of their being crossed at inter- 
vals by the joints of the voussoirs. 

The second member of the entablature was the frieze, 
known from its crowning function as @puyxos or Opuyxos, 
and from its encircling character as dvafwpa or fovn. 
When divided into triglyphs and metopes it was known as 
tplyrxudos or tTpiyAudov; when continuously decorated with 
geometric or floral designs as coopodopos ; when with fig- 
ured sculpture as Cwoddpos, Cwddpos. 

The divided frieze may be conceived as suggesting the 
ceiling beams by means of its triglyphs or dentils; when 
continuous, as in the Ionic, it was treated as a second 
epistyle to elevate the ceiling structure, or as a covering 
to hide it from view. In the Doric temple, the actual ceil- 
ing beams were raised so as to rest, not on the epistyle, but 
on the frieze. Hence, triglyphs and dentils ceased to be 
structural and were mere decorative forms. 

The general form of the frieze agreed with that of the 
epistyle in being a regular parallelopipedon, sometimes 
modified by a sight curvature in plan or elevation. It had 
a visible front and back, but no soffit. It was, moreover, 
connected with the epistyle by a taenia or other moulding 
which served as a base for the frieze as well as a crown 
for the epistyle. It had its own crowning moulding. 
Its function differed from that of the epistyle in being 


1 Koldewey, Taf. 21. 2Durm, 293. 


a ae ieee, | pale aa i 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 109 


more closely related to ceiling and roof. Hence we may 
classify the forms of friezes as : — 

(a) Those which symbolize the ceiling beams. 

(6) Those which do not symbolize the ceiling beams. 

The Doric triglyphon (tp/yAvdov) may be regarded as 
of the former class. As a decoration it matters little 
whether it corresponds or not with the actual position 


Fic. 126.— Triangular Fie. 127. — Semicircular 
' grooves, Temple of grooves, Temple of 
Poseidon, Paestum. Apollo, Metapontum, 


of the ceiling beams. Nor need we concern ourselves 
as to whether the name originated because each free 
standing triglyph was channelled on three sides,! or 
because the channels were triangular in 

shape,” or because each triglyph may be [| 
considered as having two whole and 

two half channellings.2 The latter in- 

terpretation is the more convenient, as 

it enables us to designate as monoglyphs,* pry, 128. — Triglyph 
diglyphs,® triglyphs and _ tetraglyphs,® from the Treas- 
forms which exhibit a smaller or larger ase pea oe 
number of channellings. ‘The form of the 

channelling was usually triangular in plan (Fig. 126), al- 
though semicircular in the triglyphs of the Temple of 
Apollo at Metapontum (Fig. 127). The channellings 
of the archaic period were terminated with a pointed 


1 Boetticher, 206. 3 Laloux, 74. 

2 Krell, 10. 4Cf. Schliemann, Tiryns, Pl. 4. 
5Cf. Tomb at Norchia, Durm, Bauk. Etr. Rém., Fig. 68. 

6Cf. Temple E, Selinous, Koldewey und Puchstein, 209. 


110 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


(Fig. 128) or round arch (Fig. 129); in the classic period 
with a depressed arch (Figs. 130, 181). In the Tholos at 
Epidauros and in Hellenistic triglyphs, a rectilinear termi- 
nation prevailed (Fig. 182). The origin and significance 


ll 


Fia. 129. — Triglyph Fic. 130. — Triglyph Fic. 131. — Triglyph 
from Temple C, from the Propy- from the Temple 
Selinous. laia, Athens. ; of Concordia, 

Akragas. 


of triglyphal channelling is not self-evident. But if we 
are right in assuming that triglyphs symbolize the ends 
of ceiling beams, we have but to go a step farther to see 


in the channelling an indication that such beams were 


often composite in character, being made 

up of two or three narrow beams in close 

,jJuxtaposition. Their independence was 

emphasized by chamfering their exposed 

joints and their union by the abacus 

Fic. 132.—Triglyph crown. ‘The semicircular and pointed 

from the Tholos, terminations of the channellings call to 
at Epidauros. : ‘ : 

mind well established forms of decoration 

in Egyptian cornices,! which may not have been without 

influence in the formation of the early Doric types. The 

influence of the scotia of the Egyptian cornice is perhaps 

to be seen in the slightly curved face of the Doric 

triglyphs of the Temple C, Selinous.2, The vertical bars 

between the grooves are known as shanks (ynpot). 


1 Perrot et Chipiez, I, Figs. 390, 393. 
2 Photograph, No. 155, by G. Incorpora, Palermo. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS i 


The second variety of frieze retained in its decora- 
tion no reference to roof or ceiling structure. It had its 
crowning mouldings, but no independent base moulding. 
The crowning moulding might be a simple 
taenia, but usually consisted of an echinus, 

a Lesbian cyma or a scotia, separated by a 
taenia and astragal. The body of the 
frieze was rectilinear in profile until the 
end of the classic period. Then curved yg. 133, — Frieze 
and pulvinated friezes abound. In the of the Propylon, 
Propylon before the Temple of Athena at ane 
Priene (Fig. 133), and in the Tower of the Winds 
at Athens, the face of the frieze was sharply concave at 
the top. Inthe Stoa of Hadrian at Athens 
(Fig. 184), and in the Baths of Diocletian 
at Rome, the concavity occurs at the base 
of the frieze. A convex frieze occurs at 
the Temple of Zeus at Labranda (Fig. 135), 
Fic. 134.—Frieze IN tombs at Myra and Mylasa and in 
of Stoa of Ha- many monuments of Syria. 
Pcs’ atlhe cyma recta appeared 
timidly, possibly for the first time, in 
the Tholos at Epidauros (Fig. 136). More 
pronounced cymas are found at Palai- 
opolis in Andros,! at Salonica? and else- 5. 435 — convex 
where. Friezes with curved profiles be- Frieze from the 
came very popular under the Byzantine Temple of Zeus, 
‘ : ‘ Labranda. 
empire. The antithema of the frieze 
seldom duplicated the face of the frieze. It was frequently 
lower and crowned by different mouldings. 
The crowning member of the entablature is the cornice 


benare and Revett, TV, Ch: 6; Pl. 6. 2 Ibid., III, Ch. 9, Pl. 8. 


412 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


(yetoov). It is distinguished by its pronounced overhang, 
and its devices for checking and controlling the rainfall 
on the roof. The main body of the cornice was usually 
a strongly marked platband in archaic and classic cor- 
nices, though narrow and unimportant 
in many cornices of a late period. Over 
the side walls of the Treasury of the 
Megarians at Olympia! projected a cornice 
of simplest form, merely a platband with- 
Wie. 186. Cone ee modification at base or summit. But 
recta Frieze from Greek cornices were seldom as simple as 
ia Tholos at this. They usually exhibited some re- 
pidauros. 
minder of the carpentry of the roof, such 
as mutules, dentils, brackets or panels, and were pro- 
vided with a crowning moulding (axpoyeiouor). 

The cornice with mutules, which is found in almost 
every structure of the Doric order, is not easy to explain. 
The mutules are apparently survivals of wooden forms, 
and probably represent boards which served as cover joints 
beneath the sheathing of the roof.2. The narrow bands 
above and below the mutules, which occur so _— 


Sa, 


- 


Fia. 137. — Cornice with mutules from the Wes of Zeus, Olympia. 


A 


in the Doric cornice, thus also receive a rational explana- 
tion, as does also the crowning moulding. A marked 


1 Olympia, I, Taf. 38. -  28ee Fig. 4, 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS Hie 


character of this type of cornice is the downward and 
outward inclination of the mutules, an indication that it 
was formed in a country where pitched roofs were com- 
mon. Cornices in which the mutules are posed horizon- 
tally do not occur prior to the Hellenistic period. <A 


7 
Itc. 1388, — Cornice with dentils from Priene. 

typical Doric cornice, as in the Temple of Zeus at 

Olympia (Fig. 137), shows, by its form, a careful pro- 

tection of lower surfaces by means of crowning drip 

mouldings. ‘Thus, a sharply pointed beak moulding caps 


the principal platband. This again overhangs the nar- 
row band above 


the mutules, ryote 


pg sorta io | I 


ing surface is 


See 
SSS 


AANUUONOOOA i HAUNANUNTDONN ZZ 
sharply under- ai VN YYZ 
eee ee ee 
times, aS in 2 
Temple C at Fic. 139. — Dentil frieze from Tomb of Amyntas, 

Telmessos. 


Selinous, the 
mutules, and even the trunnels, were shaped so as to 
throw the drip outward as far as possible. 

The antithema, or back of the cornice, was variously 
adjusted so as to unite with the horizontal ceiling beams 
or sloping rafters of the roof. 

The cornice with dentils (yevonmodes, kAtvorrodes)) Was 
characteristic of Ionic buildings of Asia Minor (Fig. 138) 


I 


114 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


where, as we have seen, the dentil band was sometimes — 


important enough to be ranked as a frieze (Fig. 139). 
When, however, a kosmophoros or a zophoros was intro- 
duced above the epistyle, the dentils became the crowning 
. moulding of the frieze, or, as their Greek name, yetonzrodes, 


Slee eee eee 


Fia. 140. — Cornice with consoles from interior of Tower of Winds, 
Athens. : 
their construction and diminished size imply, the bed 
mould or supports of the cornice. ‘Their appearance also 
-in the raking cornice (katayeicov) of the gable strength- 
ened the association with the cornice. ‘The cornice with 
brackets or consoles, much used by Roman and Byzantine 
architects, occurs in the interior of the tower of the 


Winds at Athens (Fig. 140). In this case, the dentils — 


= 


Fia. 141.— Cornice with coffering from the Temple of Demeter, Paestum. 


appear as supports for the cap moulding of the cornice— 
a very unusual disposition. 

The cornice with cofferings, found on the gable of the 
Temple of Demeter at Paestum (Fig. 141), constitutes a 
fourth type less widely spread. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 115 


There still remains the cornice which is devoid of all 
reminiscences of carpentry, such as that of the Erech- 
theion (Fig. 142) and other Attic-Ionic buildings. This 
cornice is characterized by simplicity and, at the same 


yyy 


GU, 


Fic. 142. — Cornice of Erechtheion, Athens. 


time, great delicacy of form, especially in the hyperbolic 
surface of its soffit.1 The crowning mouldings of the 
geison in the Erechtheion are a carved egg and dart over 
the bead and reel. In the Hellenistic period in Asia Mi- 
nor, the cyma reversa was commonly substituted for the 
egg and dart. 

Complex or subdivided cornices are found on the ar- 


Be Rina: Seta 
ummm 


Z 


SSE 


Fig. 143, — Subdivided cornice from the Treasury of Gela, Olympia. 


chaic Temple of Demeter at Gaggera, near Selinous, and 

on the Treasury of Gela at Olympia (Fig. 143). 
Curvature of lines and surfaces is observable in some 

Greek cornices. ‘The front horizontal cornice of the 


1 Penrose, 51. 


116 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Temple at Segesta curves inward in plan, whereas the 
lateral cornices of the so-called Temple of Poseidon! at 
Paestum have a distinct outward curve in plan; those of 

_ the Parthenon? 


re, 


Fic. 144. — Coffered ceilings with, and without, 
beams, from the Temple of Apollo, Phigaleia. 


and other build- 
ings curve in the 
vertical plane. 
Thus the curva- 
ture, observable 


in the bases of | 


many Greek 
temples, in some 
caseS was ex- 
tended to the en- 
tablature also. 
Sometimes, as at 
Corinth, this cur- 


vature seems to 


have been ap- 


plied to the 


fagade only. A 
curved profile, 
such as was in- 


troduced into late ~ 


Ionic friezes, was 
attempted also in 


cornices — probably not, however, before the Roman 
period. Thus the cornice of the Temple of Castor 
and Pollux at Rome? was sharply concave at the summit, 


1 Burckhardt, Cicerone I., 4; Goodyear, A.J.A., X (1895), 10. 


2 Penrose, 22. 
8 d’Espouy, Pl. 90. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS GEL 


while that of the Temple of Concord showed in profile 
a cyma recta. 
7. Crmines AND Roors.— Greek ceilings (opoda/) 


may be formally classified as those which consist of a net- 


work of closely juxtaposed panels or coffers (wAatova Te- 

(otpwripes), and those which 

exhibit also the large hori- 

zontal beams (ced ldes, doxor). 

of Apollo at Phigaleia (Fig. ce ie 

144). We may readily believe that the earliest type 

was that which represented most clearly the actual con- 
beams were of later date. 

The round logs of prehis- 

toric buildings seem to have 
but squared ceiling beams 
survive throughout the whole 
history of Greek architecture. 

lar in form, the only modification being the cap moulding 

and a socket to support the coffers (Fig. 145). In 

Hellenistic and Roman buildings, the large ceiling beams 


Tpaywva, patTvopata) sepa- : | 
YT 
Both types may be seen in 
struction, and that the types which omitted the indication 
left no impress on the ceil- 
Fie. 146.— Ceiling beam from the Through the classic period 
were treated like epistyles with overlapping fasciae 


rated by narrow lath-like bands 
the peristyle of the Temple Fic. 145.—Ceiling beam from Par- 
ae of lattice-work or of ceiling 
ing forms of classic times, 
TI as Readies these beams were quadrangu- 
(Figs. 146-147). 


118 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


The stroteres, or smaller ceiling bands, occur with or 
without cap mouldings, and show soffits either plain or with 
a central astragal. The cofferings varied in depth, being 

boidal cofferings are found 


: simple in early and classic 
GY 
| Y examples (lig. 148), and 
ZY A complex in some classic 
Uj (Fig. 149), and many Hel- 
lenistic, buildings. Cof- 

in the Temple of Apollo 

Fic. 147.—Ceiling beam from the Temple at Phigaleia, in the P hilip- 
Beas aay ee peion at Olympia (Fig. 

150) and elsewhere. The coffers were usually terminated 
by horizontal panels (arivaxes, kaduvppatia). In the case 


of the Theseion,! some of these panels were arranged so that 
eo could be removed. In the Parthenon, the cofferings 


os 


square form, but rhom- 


Fie. 148. — Cofferings from the Thesion, Maen 


were terminated by a slightly curved surface (ovpavos, 
oupavioxos). Ionic cofferings were richly profiled with 
a succession of mouldings, and, in general, were larger 
and deeper than Doric cofferings. The Temple of Athena 
at Priene offers an excellent example. Roman cofferings 
were sometimes very elaborate in design, as, for example, 
in the vault of the triumphal arch at Orange,? France. 


1 Bates, in A.J.A., V (1901), 37-50. 2 Caristie, Pl. 14. 


ferings were usually of 


ie 


i 
: 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 119 


The forms of vaults varied according to the form of the 
spaces covered. As with portals and window openings, 
the forms of long passages might be triangular or trape- 
zoidal, pointed or round arched. The galleries at Tiryns 
and the tombs at Mycenae furnish early examples of tri- 


Fia. 149. — Cofferings from the Temple of Athena, Priene. 


angular and pointed passages. Of round-arched vaults 
the most instructive examples are to be found at Perga- 
mon.t Here, leading to the middle terrace of the gymna- 
sium, is an example of a vaulted winding stairway, dating 


Fic. 150. — Cofferings from the Philippeion, Olympia. 


apparently from the period of the Attalids. It did not 
occur to the architect to cover his stairway with a raking 
vault, as would have been done by an Assyrian or a Roman 
builder. He made five horizontal barrel vaults, turning 


1 Doerpfeld, in Ath. Mitt., XXIX (1904), 180-137, Taf. 11-18. 


120 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


twice at right angles, once at an acute, and once at an 
obtuse, angle, returning upon itself at a higher level. The 
difficulty of constructing vaults which interpenetrate, or 
vaults which turn an angle, was almost entirely avoided 
by the device of making each successive vault spring 
from a higher level. Even more important as a prototype 
of Roman and mediaeval vaulting systems are the vaults 
found within a mound known as the Tomb of Telephos 
just outside the city of Pergamon. Here two barrel- 


vaulted passages of the same height meet at right angles, — 


one of which penetrates without crossing the other, result- 
ing in half a bay of a quadripartite, cross-groined vault.1 
When stone roofs for square spaces were undertaken, as 
in the Tomb at Mylasa,? intersecting cloister vaults were 
avoided by a system of construction reminding one of the 
pyramidal Colchian roofs described by Vitruvius. When 
a small polygonal space was to be roofed with stone, as in 
the Tower of the Winds at Athens, a polygonal dome was 
avoided, and a series of marble slabs were set on end con- 
verging toward a common centre, like the roof of a Phrygian 
hut.4 Circular buildings were sometimes covered by vaults, 
as was the case with the Mycenaean tholoi and the inner 
chambers of the great tombs at Halikarnassos and at Knidos, 


where the blocks of stone were laid in horizontal courses — 


so as to form highly-pointed domes. Hemispherical domes 
were avoided. Whether the semi-dome which crowned 
Roman exedrae and the apses of early Christian churches 
had also its prototype in Greek apsidal buildings, like the 
Doric Templeat Samothrace,’ is as yet an unsettled problem. 


1 Choisy, I, 518, Fig. 6. 8 Vitruvius, IT, 1, 4. 
2 Ion. Antiq., II, Pls. 24-25. 4 Tbid., I, 1, 5. 
5 Conze-Hauser-Niemann, I, Taf. 17-20. 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS a ia | 


The roof (é€rwpodia also opody, oréyn) was in many build- 
ings, in form as well as construction, quite distinct from 
the horizontal ceilings, and must be considered separately. 
Pent, pyramidal, conical and other types of roofs are 
found as covers for porches, tombs and honorary monu- 
ments. The gable roof, almost universally employed 
for temples, was applied also to palaces and civic build- 
ings. When concealed from view by horizontal ceilings, 
the appearance of the roof from the interior of buildings 
could be neglected, but when exposed to view, it was con- 
structed so as to present a coffered form.! 

In its outer aspect, the gable roof? was likened to an 
eagle (aetos, aérwua), or winged thing (atepvyiov) with 
two wings (7rTépuyes). 

The construction of the roof, if horizontal, was hidden 
by a covering of clay ; if peaked, by tiles of terra-cotta or 
marble. The forms 
of these tiles varied 
considerably. Never- 
theless, two kinds 
were always em- 
ployed, the rain tiles 
(cMAnVES, TTEyATTHpES ) 
and the cover tiles 
(KaduTrTHpes ). The Fig. 151.— Roof tiles from the Heraion, 
rain tiles were some- Ohne 
times slightly curved, as in the Heraion at Olympia (Fig. 
151), but were more frequently flat with raised edges. 
The cover tiles were sometimes curved, as in the Heraion 


1 Choisy, Htudes, 147-152, holds that the Eastern cella of the Erech- 
theion had no horizontal ceiling. 
2 Boetticher, 246, 


122 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


and in the Treasury of Gela at Olympia (Fig. 152); but 
in the classic period were more frequently triangular, 
as in the Temple of Zeus, 
Olympia, the Parthenon (Fig. 
153) and the Erechtheion. 

In cases of pyramidal, con- 
ical and intersecting roofs, 
the forms of these tiles were 

a necessarily modified in form. 

‘Treasury of Gela, Olympia. | In the Choragic Monument of 

Lysicrates, the roof consists 

of a solid block of marble carved on its upper surface 
to imitate tiles of a scale or leaf pattern (Fig. 104). 

The ridge of 
the roof was 


provided with De bs. 
half round, later Je fb Lf 
with saddle 

LO 


back, tiles (Fig. EG 


155), usually D> /, x 
decorated with R7/ VA 
anthemia, which KX | Ie7, 


faced in two : 
directions. At Fig. 153.— Roof tiles from the Parthenon. 
the lower extremities of the line of cover tiles a terminus 
was formed by similar decorative tiles, known as ante- 
fixes. These either reflected the semicircular and tri- 
angular forms of the cover tiles, or were formed to imitate 
a lotus flower or a palmette, or represented animal or 
human heads. 

The simae (o1pat) belong, properly, to the roof. ‘These 
varied in profile, and show either rectilinear or convex 


ee 


Nats a 


: , 


oe ee ae 
ft’ 


ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 128 


or concave profiles, or the doubly curved cyma reversa 
or cyma recta (Figs 156-159). With these principal 


Hi i 


Arn \ 


Fic. a ay tiles from Fic. 155. — Ridge tile 
the Monument of Lysicrates, from the Temple of 
Athens. Aphaia, Aegina. 


mouldings were associated subordinate base or cap mould- 
ings of varied profiles. Water spouts (tdpoppca) were 


Yy 
Fig. 156.—Sima of the Treasury of 


Gela, Olympia. Fig. 157. — Sima of the Parthenon. 


arranged at intervals, sometimes simple pipe stems 
(Fig. 160), more frequently in the form of lion heads 


YY 
4 


Fie. 158.—Sima of the Temple of Fic. 159.—Sima of the Temple of 
Aphaia, Aegina. Athena, Priene. 
(Acovroxéparor), seldom dog heads or other symbols. 
Simae are found invariably on the raking cornices, and 
rarely more than a short distance from the cornices of 


Lo GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the long sides. They occur very seldom on the hori- 
zontal cornices of the pediments. 

The gable roof was terminated at each end by a trian- 
gular wall, called a tympanum (tvpzavov). The tympanum 
was set back so as to provide a 
suitable base or pediment for 
gable sculptures, and was pro- 
vided with a crowning mould- 
ing of its own. Above the 
tympanum were the projecting 
Fra. 160, — Sima with water spout, TAS10E C@TMIGEH SAGs 

‘Athena Moses or xataétita) of the roof. 

In the classic period these 

were distinguished from the horizontal cornices by the 

absence of mutules and dentils, and by the presence of a 
crowning sima. 

Ordinarily the form of the gable front was a rectilinear 


triangle, but the refinement of curved surfaces was not 


limited to krepi- 
domas and entab- 
latures and, once 
introduced, it 
necessarily modi- 
fied the gable 
forms =" Lhius2<in 
the so-called The- 
seion,! the raking 
cornices as well as 
the pediment had 
a delicate vertical curvature. In the so-called Temple of 
Poseidon at Paestum,? the gable cornices were curved 


Fic. 161.— Central acroterion from the Heraion, 
Olympia. 


1 Penrose, 73. 2 Brooklyn Institute photograph, No, 28. 


yo ae 


fo 


‘Ye ee 


. 
~ b+ ao wr 
es ie oil ee al a ie 


a ee ARCHITECTURAL FORMS 125 


inwards towards the roof of the building. The general 
form of the gable front was also modified by the emphasis 
laid upon the extremities. Here were placed acroteria 


Fic. 162.— Lateral acroterion from the Old 
Temple of Athena, Athens. 


(axpwTnpia), ornaments which, in their earliest forms, 
symbolized the ridge-pole (Fig. 161) and wall plate (Fig. 
162) of wooden buildings. In later times, tripods, grif- 

_ fins, victories, etc., were substituted for the early geometric 


forms. 


1 lly 


CHAPTER III 


PROPORTION 


GREEK architects concerned themselves not only with 
forms, decoration and composition, but laid special 
emphasis on proportion. ‘This tendency to make an exact 
science of architecture increased rapidly, until in the 
Hellenistic period there were many architects who sought — 
in their buildings and by their writings to establish the 
true canons of proportion. Unfortunately, these books 
are not preserved to us, and we are largely dependent 
upon Vitruvius! to acquaint us with Greek conceptions 
of proportion. He tells us that they meant by propor- 
tion a harmony of ratios of the parts with the whole. 
This treatment of the proportions of various classes of — 
buildings implies the establishment first of the major or 
fundamental, and then of the minor, or subsidiary, ratios. 

1. MaAgor Ratios. —In considering temple architecture 
the major ratios in plan are those of the temple base and 
of the cella; in elevation, those of the facade and sides of 
the peristyle. Even in these primary measurements con- 
siderable variety of practice prevailed. In laying out a 
temple, Koldewey and Puchstein ? tell us that the measure- 
ments of the cella were first determined, then those of the 
surrounding peristyle. In many Sicilian temples cella 
and peristyle were not harmoniously adjusted, hence their 
measurements were in great measure independent of each 


1 Vitruvius, IIT, 1. 2 Koldewey und Puchstein, 229. 
126 


ion aee 
Yo De ee 


=: 


PROPORTION Nay 


other. In the classical period this adjustment became 
more imperative, and the measurements of the temple 
base and of the peristyle were consequently quite as im- 
portant as those of the cella. From a study of the pro- 
portions of classical templés! it may be gathered that the 
fundamental ratio was sometimes taken from the rectangle 
made by the lowest step of the krepidoma, in other cases 
it was derived from the stylobate and occasionally from 
the axes of the corner columns. The most convenient 
basis for exact measurement was the stylobate, and this 
seems to have furnished the standards in Hellenistic and 
Roman times. 

The stylobate rectangle shows various forms. In the 
archaic period it often approximated the ratio 3:1; 
classic stylobates showed usually a more contracted 
rectangle of about 2.50: 1; Hellenistic stylobates meas- 
ured about 2:1. Exceptions to this general rule were, 
however, so frequent that Perrot? hesitates to assign to 
the general proportions of the plan of a temple any chrono- 
logical value. There is little reason to believe that the 
rectangle with a ratio known as the “golden section” 
figured either theoretically or practically in the stylobate 
plans of Greek temples.® 

The plan of the temple cella varied like that of the 
stylobate, from a long rectangle to one whose length was 
double its breadth. Regulations for the subdivision of 
the cella are given by Vitruvius,* who assigns to the naos 
a length equivalent to one and a quarter times the 
breadth of the cella, and to the combined depth of 


1 Lloyd-Penrose, 111-116 ; Lloyd-Cockerell, 63-94. 
2 Perrot et Chipiez, VII, 551. 
3 Schultz, 10. 4 Vitruvius, IV, 4, 1. 


128 , GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


pronaos, or front porch, and the opisthodomos, or rear 
porch, three quarters of the cella breadth. 

In elevations the fundamental ratios seem to have been 
variously constituted. For example, the krepidoma, 
the gable, or the sima of the cornice might be included or 
excluded from the computation. When the stylobate 
was taken as the base of the rectangle, the krepidoma was 
naturally excluded. The gable and the sima of the 
cornice, not being factors of the side elevation of a temple, 
were also usually excluded. In the case of elevations, 
therefore, the fundamental ratios were usually made up of 
the breadth or length of the stylobate on the one hand, 
and of the height of the order on the other. Measured 
thus the general proportions of the fagade of Greek 
temples varied from a square to long rectangles. These 
variations depended chiefly upon the number of columns 
to be exhibited in front. The variations due to differ- 
ences of style or period were less important. The square, 
as a major ratio, may be recognized in the facades of most 
tetrastyle temples of all periods. If ten units be arbitra- 
rily established as the measure of the height of the columns 
and entablature, then the length of the front stylobate 
seems to have been about fourteen for Ionic, and eighteen 
for Doric, hexastyles, about twenty for octostyles, twenty- 
two for decastyles and thirty-six for dodecastyles.1 

Basilicas, according to Vitruvius,? should exhibit a 
breadth of not less than one-third, nor more than one- 
half, their length. That is to say, they have much the 
same dimensions as the stylobates of temples. The 

1 These measurements are deduced from the measurements given by 


Hittorff et Zanth, 393-401. 
2 Vitruvius, V, 1, 4. 


PROPORTION 129 


breadth of the basilica is further divided into fifths; 
one-fifth being taken for each of the side aisles and three- 
fifths for the central nave. The elevation follows from 
the ground plan, the height of the columns being made 
equal to the breadth of the aisles. The fundamental 
ratios of the stoa are similarly determined.|! 

In the case of the private house the atrium furnished 
the fundamental measurements. It is noteworthy that 
these differ from those of the temple and _ basilica. 
Vitruvius? describes three varieties; (1) atria having a 
breadth equal to two-thirds of their length, (2) those with 
a breadth equal to three-fifths of their length, (3) those 
the breadth of which is the side of a square, the diagonal 
of which furnishes the length. ‘The atria of Pompeian 
houses are found by Mau® to harmonize fairly well with 
these recommendations of Vitruvius. 

Hellenistic houses excavated at Priene‘ exhibit a prostas, 
or porch, with the ratio of two units in depth to three 
in breadth before an oikos which is almost uniformly 
a perfect square. 

Circular buildings offered a somewhat different prob- 
lem. In the case of the tholos the dimensions were taken 
from the diameter of the cella.© In the theatre the 
orchestra was the starting-point for other measurements. 
By inscribing within the inside of the orchestra triangles 
or squares® or a pentagon,’ Vitruvius in ancient, and 
Oemichen in modern, times deduced the positions of 
the staircases of the theatron and the walls of the skene. 


1 Vitruvius, V, 9. 4 Priene, 290. 
2 [bid., V1, 3, 3. 5 Vitruvius, IV, 8. 
3 Mau, 24, 6, 247. id BUGS Nec sO. Mie 


7 Oemichen, 51. 
K 


/ 
130 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


2. Minor RaAtrios.— We may now consider some of 
the minor ratios. 

Wall ratios, expressed in the relation of the thickness 
to the height, were conditioned by technique, style and 
other considerations. In stone and marble buildings 
the walls were naturally thinner than when crude brick 
was employed. In the composition of temples it was 
convenient that the antae of walls should be equal in 
breadth to the diameter of adjacent columns. Hence 
the walls themselves were usually less than a column 
diameter in thickness, and, being higher than the columns, 
their general dimensions were slenderer. Thus, in Doric 
temples the cella walls were given a height from nine to 
ten and a half times their breadth, and in Ionic temples 
from eleven and a half to thirteen.1 

Doorway ratios received much attention, not so much ~ 
with relation to the floor space within? as to mere form. 
The height of the doorways of the Arsenal at Peiraieus 
were one and a half times their breadth. The Vitruvian 
dimensions indicate a preference for slenderer openings. 
A long period of experimentation must be assumed be- 
fore Vitruvius? could lay down his rules for Doric, Ionic 
and Attic doorways, and give the proper dimensions for 
their openings, their framework, their diminution and even 
for the panelling, uprights and crosspieces of the doors 
themselves. 

Column ratios naturally demanded most attention. As 
columns formed a striking feature in Greek buildings 
we may well believe that the relation of the height of the 
column to the total height of a building figured more 
or less prominently in the architect’s calculations. In 


1 Durm, 75, 239. 2 Ibid., 88. 8 Vitruvius, IV,6. . 


PROPORTION 131 


archaic buildings the column was less than half the 
‘total height. In the classic period W. W. Lloyd finds! 
“an affection for the rule that the height of the column 
shall exceed the joint height of pediment, entablature 
and stylobate and that the excess shall be equal to 
one aliquot part that is their common measure.” Thus 
the relation of the column height to the remainder of 
the height of the facade in the case of the Theseion is 
that of five to four; at Phigaleia, seven to six; in the 
Parthenon, ten to nine. In Hellenistic buildings the 
column was a still larger fraction of the total height. 
A more general ratio to be observed was that of the 
column to its entablature. This varied according to 
locality, style and period. In countries such as Sicily 
and southern Italy, subject to earthquakes and provided 
with friable building material, columns and their entab- 
latures remained throughout all periods heavier than in 
Greece proper. Buildings of the Doric style were nor- 
mally more massive than those of the Ionic. The taste 
of the period also played its part in framing these ratios. 
Heavy entablatures, characteristic of the archaic period, 
were not tolerated in later days. In the Temple of 
Apollo at Corinth the entablature is more than one-half 
the height of the columns; in the Parthenon it is about 
one-third; in the Temple of Zeus at Nemea one-fourth, 
and in the Temple of Dionysos at Pergamon one-fifth. 
This general transformation of taste is evident in spite 
of the Greek love of variety, which makes it impossible 
to apply the rule mechanically so as to establish an exact 
chronological series.” 
1 Lloyd-Cockerell, 66. 


2 Some of the difficulties in accepting the proportions of buildings as 
an index of their date are considered in A.J. A., IX (1894), 521-532. 


132 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


* 


Another characteristic ratio is that of the column to the 


intercolumniation. Here also various considerations deter- 


mined whether the intercolumniations should be relatively 
wide or narrow. For example, the colonnades of the mar- 
ket-place were much more widely spaced than those of the 
temples. Colonnades of wood permitted of wider interco- 
lumniation than those of stone. ‘Those of friable stone 
were at first more closely set than was necessary. Kolde- 
wey thas shown that both in Sicily and southern Italy there 


was a constant tendency in the archaic period to widen the 


intercolumniation, and in the classic period a taste for more 
closely spaced columns. Vitruvius? preserves to us the 
names of several ratios of this sort derived from late Greek 
writers. The ratio was called pyknostyle (au«veotunos) 
when the intercolumniations measured one and one-half 
times the lower diameter of the column, systyle (ovaTvdos) 
when two diameters, eustyle (evorvAos) when they reached 
two and a quarter diameters, diastyle (évdotvAos) when 
three diameters, and araiostyle (apateorvAo0s) when more 
than three diameters. These proportions show a taste 
for wider intercolumniations than were favored in ear- 
her days. Judged by this standard the Parthenon inter- 
columniations would be too narrow to be classed even 
as pyknostyle. 

It may be further noticed that not merely the linear 
ratio of column diameter to intercolumniation, but the 
ratio of intercolumniation to column height was an im- 
portant factor in Greek proportions. In other words the 
relation of mass to void was considered. Experience 
proved that, when very wide intercolumniations were 
used, correspondingly heavy columns should be employed. 


1 Koldewey und Puchstein, 230. 2 Vitruvius, III, 3. 


PROPORTION Tao 


The rule formulated by Vitruvius! for temples was that 
for araiostyle temples the columns should be eight lower 
diameters in height; for diastyle, eight and one-half lower 
diameters; for eustyle and systyle, nine and one-half, and 
for pyknostyle ten lower diameters. These proportions 
imply a taste for the slender columns prevalent in the 
Hellenistic period. The ratio of column height to col- 
umn thickness was an obvious ratio, easily manipulated so 
as to produce a desired effect. In spite of many examples 
of individual variation the prevailing taste progressed from 
heavy to lighter forms. Thus, the height of Doric col- 
umns, measured in terms of the lower diameter, was in the 
Temple of Apollo at Corinth, 4.32; in Temple C, Seli- 
nous, 4.85; in the Parthenon, 5.47; in the Theseion, 5.62; 
in the Temple of Zeus at Nemea, 6.598 and in the Temple 
of Dionysos at Pergamon, 9.81. Ionic columns similarly 
became slenderer. ‘The columns of the Temple of Athena 
Nike measure 7.575 lower diameters; those of the Temple 
of Athena at Priene, nine lower diameters; those of the 
Temple of Apollo near Miletos, ten lower diameters. 

In establishing the normal ratio of the capitals and 
bases of columns there was the same tendency from heavy 
to lighter forms. The Greeks began by giving too much 
projection or too much height to capitals and bases, and 
ended by almost effacing them. This is shown most 
clearly in tracing the history of the Doric echinus.? In 
early examples, as in Temples C and D, Selinous and in 
the two temples at Metapontum,? the echinus was relatively 
low and had an excessive overhang; in the so-called Tem- 
ple of Poseidon at Paestum, in the Temple of Apollo at 


1 Vitruvius, III, 3, 10. 2 See the plates in Krell. 
3 De Luynes, Pls. 5, 9. 


134 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Corinth and in the splendid capitals of the Temple of 
Aphaia at Aegina the echinus gained in height and 
lost in overhang; in the Parthenon the echinus began 
again to be too low and had but little overhang. In the 
Temple of Zeus at Nemea and the Temple of Dionysos at 
Pergamon the echinus was a slight moulding having very —_— 
little height, and almost no overhang. ‘The abacus, which : 
often exceeded the echinus in height in the early and late 
periods, was less significant in the classical period. In the 3 
Temple of Aphaia at Aegina the echinus was related tothe 
abacus as 1.32 to one; in the Temple of Zeus at Olympia 
as 1.41 to one. But the striking fact in reference to the 
height of the Doric capital is its relation to the height of 
the shaft. At Corinth the ratio is that of one to 7.80; in 
Temple C, Selinous, one to 8.20; at Segesta, one to 9.49; 
‘in the Theseion, one to 11.25; in the Parthenon, one to _ 
12.12; at the Temple of Apollo at Delos, one to 14.902; 
in the Temple of Zeus at Nemea, one to 27.38; and in the 
Temple of Dionysos at Pergamon it is about one to 30. 
Thus it appears that the Doric capital as the functional 
crown of the column gradually diminished in importance. _ 
Similarly, in the Ionic order, the older forms of capitals as 
exemplified at Neandreia and in the early capitals from 
the Acropolis at Athens were heavy. They were de- Sh 
signed to support a heavy entablature. Lighter forms a 
prevailed in the classic period. In the Hellenistic period _ 
the spiral band was sometimes so narrow as to lose all 
significance as a functional support, and became a merely 
decorative crown. The Ionic abacus also diminished in _ 
importance. Much care was expended on the proper sin. 
ratios of the details of the Ionic capital, such as the pro- 
jection of the pulvinus and of the oculus, and the width of ag 


PROPORTION E30 


the channels. Some of these ratios are considered by 
Vitruvius. 

Bases of columns were about equal in height to the cap- 
itals and varied accordingly. Lofty, clumsy bases are 
likely to belong to the early period and bases of insig- 
nificant height to the later period. The form of bases 
varied so much in the early, classic and even in the 
Hellenistic period that it is difficult to lay down general 
rules. The general tendency, however, was toward the 
so-called Attic-Ionic, or Corinthian, base with two torus 
mouldings separated by a scotia.  Asiatic-Ionic bases 
exhibited many forms, the most common of which was a 
single torus set on a double trochilos or scotia. Vitru- 
vius? assumes that the base should measure in height one- 
third of the lower diameter of the column, and that 
beneath it should be a plinth of one-half this height. The 
height of the two types of bases he subdivides as follows: — 


ATTIc-IONIC ASIATIC-IONIC 
Upper torus. Torus . 


Scotia . Upper trochilos 


aloo aloo oolbo 
spo sajpo seo 


. Lower torus Lower trochilos 


Proportions similar to these we find in late classic and 
Hellenistic buildings. In the Temple of Athena at Priene? 
there are bases of the Asiatic-Ionic form with somewhat 
heavier torus mouldings, the ratio of torus to the rest 
being nearly two to three instead of three to four. In the 
Temple of Artemis at Magnesia* the bases of the Attic- 
Ionic form present essentially the Vitruvian proportions. 

The ratios of shafts, apart from their capitals and bases, 
need not detain us long. ‘The tendency toward sienderer 


1 Vitruvius, III, 5. 2 Ibid. 8 Priene, 92. 4 Magnesia, 50. 


136 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


columns was chiefly a change in the proportions of the 
shaft and may be expressed in essentially the same ratios. 
In considering the forms of shafts we noticed that the 
conical shaft of the early period was abandoned for a more 
cylindrical shaft in the later period. Diminution is a 
quality in shafts which shows considerable variation — 
within the same period; nevertheless, astrong diminution 
like that of the columns at Corinth, + of the lower 

diameter, would be more normal for an early period than __ 
the almost cylindrical shafts such as those at Nemea, — 
which show a diminution of only one-fifth of the lower 
diameter. Jonic shafts are even more cylindrical through- 
out their entire history. Their diminutions vary from 
one-sixth to one-eighth of the lower diameters. It is 
more difficult to generalize in the matter of the entasis of 
shafts. In the Doric style the entasis seems to be strong _ 
in early examples, especially in Sicily and southern Italy. 
Later the more nearly cylindrical shaft has correspond- 
ingly less entasis. In the Ionic style the entasis was 
more delicate than in the Doric. High columns demanded 
a stronger entasis than low ones. The following table, taken 
from Penrose,! give the ratios of some Athenian columns. 


ENTASIS IN TERMS OF 
LOWER DIAMETER. 


ENTASIS IN TERMS OF 
LENGTH OF SHAFT, 


Erechtheion. . . zoet 
a heseron' see ear whe 
Parthenon . shy 
Propylaia, small order sia 
Propylaia, large order. sha 
Olympicion. . S.jee * seer 345 


PROPORTION 137 


Penrose! proposes a mathematical formula for calculat- 
ing the amount of entasis in any proposed case, but does 
not suppose that the Greek architects made use of such 
formulae. 

The special ratios of the entablature concern its verti- 
cal and its horizontal divisions. When the frieze was 
absent, as at Priene, the entablature was divided verti- 
cally into two equal parts, the epistyle on the one hand, 
and dentils, corona and sima on the other. When the 
frieze was added, the tendency was to subdivide the en- 
tablature into three equal parts; epistyle, frieze and the 
cornice with its sima. 

The epistyle, having a heavier burden to carry, was often 
more massive than frieze or cornice. In the Ionic and 
late Doric styles it was usually subdivided into three 
superposed fasciae. Considerable variety characterized 
the ratios of these fasciae to each other. ‘They were 
rarely all equal in height, but at the Temple of Artemis 
at Magnesia and the Temple of Apollo near Miletos the 
two upper fasciae were of equal height; at the Porch of 
the Maidens of the Erechtheion the two lower fasciae were 
equal in height. In some buildings of the classic period, 
as the Temple of Athena Nike and the Erechtheion, and 
in some later buildings, as the Temple of Athena at 
Priene, each fascia was given slightly greater height and 
projection than the one below it. This practice became 
crystallized in the regulation of Vitruvius? giving to the 
lower, middle and upper fasciae the ratios of three, four 
and five, and to the crowning moulding one-seventh of the 
total height of the epistyle. 

The Doric frieze in early Sicilian temples was slightly 


1 Penrose, 123, 2 Vitruvius, ITI, 5, 10, 


“eS oe 


138 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


inferior in height to the epistyle, but equal to it at Cor- 
inth, Aegina and at Athens. The dimensions of the 
triglyphs varied considerably from low, heavy forms to 
slenderer ones until the norm was set by Vitruvius! of 
breadth: height=1: 13. The metopes were normally 
square, though often modified by the spacing of the col- 
umns. Vitruvius further subdivides the breadth of the 
triglyphs into six parts, of which three are taken by the 
two full and two half grooves and three by the interven- 
ing shanks (umpot). The ratio of triglyph breadth to 
metope breadth was approximate equality in early temples. 
In Temple C, Selinous, it was nine to ten; in Temple D, 
Selinous, eight to nine. Later the triglyphs became rela- 
tively slenderer. At Aegina and in the Theseion they 
are related to the metopes as five to eight. The normal 
relation was as one to one and a half. | 
The Ionic frieze, when without decoration, served chiefly 
to increase the height of the entablature. When decorated, 
its individual importance increased. Hence the regula- 
tion expressed by Vitruvius,” that an unsculptured frieze 
should be in height one-fourth lower than the epistyle, 
but if sculptured it should be one-fourth higher than the 
epistyle. In late Hellenistic buildings the frieze was fre- 
quently given such importance that the slender epistyle 
was rendered insignificant, as, for example, in the Temple —_— 
of Herakles at Cori. 
The cornice was a member which varied greatly in its 
proportions. Its height, reckoned without the sima, was 
related to that of the frieze at Corinth and in Temple C, 
Selinous, as one to one and a half; at Aegina and in the 
Temple of Zeus at Olympia, as one to two and a half; at 


1 Vitruvius, IV, 3, 4. 2 Tbid., III, 5, 10. 8q’Espouy, Pl. 35. 
; pouy 


PROPORTION 139 


Nemea as one to three. The cornice, therefore, in the 
Doric order gradually diminished in importance. In the 
Tonic order of Asia Minor the dentils were an important 
feature of the entablature. In Athens they were usually 
omitted and the geison assumed greater importance. The 
projection of cornices varied in appearance and effect. 
The Asiatic-Ionic cornice, owing to its dentils, projected 
gradually from the face of the building. In Doric and 
in Attic-Ionic buildings the projection of the cornice 
was more abrupt. The Greeks, in somewhat the same 
manner as the Florentines, made use of cornices to 
produce an effect. Thus, at Priene, the cornice of the 
Asklepieion was relatively heavier than that of the 
neighboring Temple of Athena. ‘The amount of pro- 
jection was also controlled by the architect. He did 
not feel with Vitruvius! that all projecting members 
were more agreeable when the amount of their pro- 
jection was equal to their height. In the Temple of 
Zeus at Nemea the low cornice projected as much as 
twice its height. Under the Romans, cornices became 
elaborately decorated, and increased both in height and 
in projection. 

Gable ratios varied within comparatively narrow limits. 
The relation of height to breadth was in many early 


examples, as Temples D and F, Selinous, and_ the 


so-called Temple of Poseidon at Paestum, that of one to 
seven. The architects of the classic period preferred a 
ratio of about one to eight, as may be seen in the gables 
of the Temples of Zeus at Olympia, the Theseion and 
the Parthenon. In some cases the slope was made still 
gentler, as in the Temple of Concordia at Akragas, and in 


1 Vitruvius, III, 5, 11. 


140 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the Erechtheion, where the ratio of height to breadth was 
one to nine. In the Temple of Demeter at Eleusis the 
ratio was one to ten. So varied, however, was the practice 
at every period that the slope of the gable has for us little 
or no chronological significance. As compared with the 
gables of Northern countries those of Greek buildings 
were relatively low. 

The proper dimensions of the raking cornice also exer- 
cised the attention of the Greek architect. This was com- 
posed of two parts, the platband or geison proper, and 
the sima. ‘To the geison was given relatively the same 
height as in the horizontal cornice. ‘To this was super- 
added the sima, which, according to Vitruvius,! should be 
one-eighth higher than the geison. The Ionic sima was, 
however, frequently higher than this, as, for example, at 
Priene. 

3. Mopirrep Ratios. —- It is evident that fixed ratios, 
however excellent they may be in an architectural draw- 
ing, will, in an actual building, appear to vary when- 
ever the spectator shifts his point of view. A building, 
therefore, like a picture or a statue, must be designed to 
be seen best from a given standpoint. Granting this, it 
follows that the ratios of the parts of a building will de-— 
pend on the proximity of the viewpoint, or the angle at 
which they are seen. ‘Those parts which lie high above 
the spectator, if seen from near at hand, will appear to be © 
smaller than they really are. Consequently, if it is neces- 
sary that they should conform to some agreeable ratio, 
they should be enlarged according to the height of the 
building or the steepness of the angle from which they 
are to be seen. This rule laid down by Plato? was carried 


1 Vitruvius, III, 5, 12. 2 Plato, Sophist, § 44. 


PROPORTION 141 


out by Greek architects, sculptors and carvers of inscrip- 
tions. That Greek architects were obliged thus to modify 
theoretical ratios has been shown by Pennethorne.! By 
the time of Vitruvius, rules for the guidance of such modi- 
fications were already laid down. For example, the Greeks 
admired a door opening narrower at the top than at the 
base, and it is evident that a very high door opening from 
a near standpoint would appear to contract toward the 
top even if the door-jambs were parallel. The Vitruvian 
regulations? for door openings are as follows: the con- 
traction for doorways less than sixteen feet in height 
should equal one-third of the breadth of the door-posts ; 
for doors from sixteen to twenty-five feet high, one-fourth 
the breadth of the door-post ; for doors from twenty-five 
to thirty feet high one-eighth the breadth of the door-post ; 
and for doors more than thirty feet high there should be 
no contraction. Similar rules were given to regulate the 
diminution of the shafts of columns,? of the height of the 
abacus,‘ and of the epistyle.°® 

4. SYMMETRICAL RATIOS OR PROPORTION.—We have 
thus far considered the general or major ratios and the spe- 
cific or minor ratios. It now remains to consider how these 
were brought into relation with each other and harmo- 
nized. One method elaborately defended by Aurés® we 
may describe as the mystical method. On examining the 
measurements of the so-called Temple of Poseidon at 
Paestum Aurés was much impressed by the preponder- 
ance of odd numbers and of square numbers which re- 
sulted from assuming the common measure of the building 


1 Pennethorne, 52 ff. 4 Tbid., III, 5, 5-7. 
2 Vitruvius, IV, 6, 1. o Foid..:T11."6,,.8. 
> 1b30., 111, 3,12. 6 Aurés, 96-103. 


142 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


to be the mean or average diameter of the columns. He — 
quotes Virgil! and Vegetius? in upholding the impor- 
tance of odd numbers and Censorinus ? for square num- 
bers. He does not, however, cite any Greek or Latin 
authority in favor of selecting the mean diameter as 
a modulus. We may remark further that some other 
modulus would have shown a preponderance of even 
numbers and that many of the prominent features of this 
temple, as, for example, the number of columns on the 
facade, appear in even numbers. Even if it could be 
proved that the Temple of Poseidon at Paestum exhibited 
an intentional preference for odd numbers, it is very 
unlikely that such a preference should have entered into 
the plans of Greek architects in general. ite 

A second method of explaining the harmony of Greek 
proportions we may call the mathematical method. Vari- 3 
ous attempts have been made to explain the harmony of 
Greek architectural proportions by mathematical means. a 
The most comprehensive of these was made by W. Schultz. 
Schultz+ observes that the plans, facades and details of __ 
most Greek buildings involve a very general use of the 
rectangle, that the Greeks distinguished ten different 
kinds of proportion and that these proportions may in 
various ways be applied to rectangles. He then cites 
five Greek temples as examples of these proportions. 
When we consider the mathematical knowledge displayed | 
by Greek architects of the hyperbola, the parabola and ~ 
other curves, it seems easy to suppose that some at least — 


A Virgil, Hel... 8, 1, 78: 

2 Vegetius, Epitoma Rei Militaris, ITI, 8. 
3 Censorinus, De Die Natali, XIV, 11. 

4 Schultz, 15 ff. 


PROPORTION 143 


of these ten formulae known to Greek mathematicians 
might have found their way into architectural plans. 
However, the general history of Greek architecture in- 
dicates that continued experimentation rather than the 
introduction of mathematical formulae was what led finally 
to normal or satisfactory proportions. 

A third method we may call the architectural method. 
It is best illustrated by Vitruvius. He thus defines pro- 
portion | Proportio est ratae partis membrorum in omni 
opere totiusque commodulatio. Proportion (davadoyia), 
therefore, consists in the common measurements subsist- 
ing between the whole and its separate parts. This 
signifies not merely such a relationship between what 
we have styled the major and minor ratios, but also 
between every member of a building and its constituent 
parts.2,— When the plan of a temple had been roughly 
sketched Vitruvius proceeds to derive the modulus 
(€u8arns) or common measure from the breadth of the 
stylobate. If, for example, the temple were to be an 
Tonic tetrastylos eustylos, this major dimension was to be 
divided into eleven and one-half equal parts ; if an Ionic 
hexastylos eustylos, into eighteen parts ; if an Ionic octo- 
stylos eustylos, into twenty-four and a half parts. One 
of these parts was taken for the lower diameter of the 
columns ; two and a quarter for the intercolumniations ; 
nine and a half for the column heights, and so on. If, 
however, the building were to be a Doric tetrastylos 


1 Vitruvius, ITI, 1, 1. 

2 Aristotle, wepl dréuwv ypayuudy tmeplppacis, I, defined symmetrical 
quantities as those having a common measure, and cited as an example, 
‘¢ 16 is symmetrical with 24 in having 4 as a common measure.”’ 

8 Vitruvius, III, 3, 7. 


144 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


diastylos, the frontal stylobate should be divided into 7 
twenty-seven parts; if a Doric hexastylos diastylos, into _ 
forty-two parts. Two of these parts should constitute 
the lower diameter of the columns; fourteen, the column 


heights; one, the height, and two and a sixth, the — va 


breadth of the capital, and so on.! It may be observed, 
however, that Vitruvius was not accustomed consciously 
to consider every detail of a building as a fraction or mul- 
tiple of this common measure or modulus. He would not 


have said that the beak moulding of the cornice was such ae 


and such a fraction of the lower diameter of the column. 
He compared adjacent parts of a building and stated their 
ratios to each other in such a way as to give the impres- 
sion that not one but many moduli were used in deter- 
_ mining the proportions of a building. Thus, for example, 
the heights of mouldings are stated as fractions of the 


members to which they belong; the middle fascia of an a 


Ionic epistyle is taken as a modulus for the geison;? the 
diameter of the oculus of an Ionic capital gives the 
amount of projection for the echinus,? and so on. This 


method of passing from one modulus to another is no- — 


where more clearly expressed by Vitruvius* than in his 
description of the Ionic doorway. From the temple 
height is derived the height of the doorway; from the 
doorway height is derived the doorway breadth and also— 


the breadth of door-jambs. From the doorway breadth 


is derived the breadth of the stiles (scapt cardinales), and 
breadth of the panels (tympana) ; from the breadth of the 
panels is determined the height of the rails (impages), and 
from the height of the rails is derived the breadth of the 


1 Vitruvius, IV, 3, 3-4. 8 Ibid., III, 5, 6-7. 
2 Ibid., II, 5, 11, 4 Ibid., IV, 6, 3-4. 


PROPORTION 145 


inner stiles (scapz). From the breadth of the door-jamb 
(antipagmentum) is derived not only the height of its ter- 
minal moulding (eymatium), but also the height of the 
lintel (supercilium), the overdoor (hyperthyrum) and the 
dimensions of the cornice brackets (ancones). From this 
example we see that though each member of the door- 
way is regarded as a modulus or measure of its immediate 
neighbor, nevertheless all are connected with each other 
and with the large dimension of the whole by a common 
measure. ‘This illustrates the Vitruvian conception of 
proportion and there is every reason to believe that the 
standpoint of the Greek authors from whom he derived 
his inspiration was not essentially different. 


CHAPTER IV 


DECORATION 


THE preceding chapters have already dealt with many | 
features of Greek architecture, which, in a broad sense, — 
might be classed as decoration. But after the refinements 
of construction and of architectural forms and proportions, __ 
there remains so much else that added charm to Greek 
buildings that we find it convenient to consider this sur- 
plus in a chapter by itself. : 

1. GREEK METHODS oF DECORATION. —If weshould 
insist that all architectural decoration should spring from 
construction, Greek architectural decoration would be 
condemned from the start. The greater part of it, like 
Oriental ornamentation, was not structural but applied. — 
We may, indeed, point to triglyphs, mutules and den- — 
tils as revealing the building methods of the carpenter ; 
but, on the other hand, devices to conceal poor construction — 
were equally abundant. Of suchanature were the stucco __ 
coverings of roughly constructed walls and columns, terra- 
cotta revetments of cornices, which were not substantial 
enough to resist the snow and rain, and revetments of wood 
which concealed the rougher members of the entablature 
and roof. In the perfected marble buildings of the classic 
period, however, this superficial dressing was, in great 
measure, abandoned. Se 

The Greeks, like the Egyptians, Assyrians and Persians, ia 

146 . 


DECORATION 147 


not satisfied with monochromatic effects in architecture, 
relied upon polychromy to give added charm. In some 
cases, aS in the ceiling at Orchomenos, the design was 
carefully carved so as to separate the colors, as in cloi- 
sonné enamels; in other cases, as in a cornice from Temple 
F, at Selinous,! the background was cut away, as in champ- 
levé enamels; but more frequently easier methods were 
adopted. In buildings covered with stucco the design 
was either scratched with a stylus and the coloring applied, 
as in fresco painting, before the stucco hardened, or the 
slower encaustic method? was employed in which the 
coloring matter was mixed with wax and applied hot with 
a brush? or spatula. Upon marble, where the colors were 
likely to overrun, the encaustic method was preferred. 
Some colors served to preserve the surface of the stucco 
or marble, others had the opposite effect. Hence, the 
contrast between smooth and weathered surfaces has some- 
times preserved schemes of decoration long after the colors 
themselves have vanished.* It has also been observed 
that different pigments vary in the amount of protection 
they give when applied to marble or stucco; thus the 
amount of weathering affords a clew as to which pigments 
were originally employed in a given design.® 

The range of colors employed was not great. In the 
archaic period, sombre colors prevailed; in the classic, 
striking contrasts were sought for; in the Hellenistic 
period, the color scale was enlarged by a more frequent 
employment of the half tones and of gilding. Reds 
were used freely in the classic period, replacing the 

1See Fig. 297 ; also Hittorff et Zanth, Pl. 55. 2 Cros et Henry, 46. 


3 Petrie, Hawara, 18, quoted by Murray, Hdbk., 397. 
4¥Fenger, 23. 5 Olympia, II, 183. 


148 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


brownish reds which prevailed earlier. Blues, ranging 
from ultramarine through a medium shade to a light one, 
were also abundant. Yellow and green were selected for 
the ornamentation of mouldings, where also gold was some- 
times employed. Blacks and whites were used sparingly. 
All of these colors were chiefly derived from earths and 
minerals. In their application strong contrasts rather 
than delicate gradations were preferred. Such contrasts 
were shown not only in the large members, such as the 


blue triglyphs which project clearly from the red or ( é 


white metopes, but in almost every ornamental detail. 
A few colors only, usually two or three, were employed 
with rhythmical sequence. The color was applied in flat 
masses, and only in exceptional cases and at a late period 
was an attempt made to produce the effect of relief by 
means of shadows.! Color harmonies and the subor-— 
dination of tones were not carried very far, but the colors 
employed in the archaic period harmonized well with 
the dark red tiles of the roofs; while the brighter colors 
of the classic period made brillant contrasts on the white 
marble buildings. 
Decoration by painting was preferred for Doric, decora- 
tion by sculpture for Ionic, architecture. This was 
especially true in the case of mouldings, where the Doric 
were shaped into the desired form and received in addition 
a painted ornament, while the Ionic were seldom left 
without some kind of carved decoration. Not only 
mouldings, but also columns, with their bases, shafts, capi- 
tals, as well as entablatures with their epistyles, friezes, 
cornices and roofs with their simae, antefixes and acroteria, 
were decorated with sculptured ornament. In the early 


1 Olympia, I, 185, Taf. 118, 4. 


DECORATION 149 


period this decoration was flat and closely related to 
painted ornament. Even pedimental sculpture was some- 
times, as in the poros reliefs from the Acropolis at Athens, 
executed in low relief. Usually, however, deep recesses 
lke the triangular gable were decorated with sculptures 
nearly, if not altogether, in the round; shallower recesses, 
like metopes, with sculptures in half relief; platbands, with 
low reef. In the classic period ornamental details show 
a beauty of form and charm in composition, which was 
usually lacking in the workmanship of the later period. 

2. TYPES OF GREEK ORNAMENT.— The types of orna- 
ment applied to the decoration of architectural forms by 
the Greeks are surprisingly few. ‘They may be classed, 
in general, as geometric, floral, zodmorphie and anthro- 
pomorphie. | 

Geometrical types reached their highest development in 
the archaic period. ‘These include closed patterns, such as 
rectangles, squares, lozenges, polygons, circles and disks, 
ovais and ovoids; running patterns, such as zigzag, rec- 
tilinear and curvilinear maeanders, scrolls and braids; dia- 
pered patterns composed of squares, polygons, circles or 
scrolls. Squares of blue glass occur in the alabaster frieze 
from Tiryns. Red and cream-colored squares in diapered 
pattern decorate a sima and acroterion from the Acropolis 
at Athens.! Rectangles are used in an interesting way in 
the decoration of the gable acroterion of the Heraion at 
Olympia.2 They are colored in regular order, violet, 
black, white, black, and, in their arrangement, form a 
steplike pattern. Lozenges were painted on the terra- 
cotta plaques from the cornice of the Treasury of Gela at 
Olympia,? and carved in the ceiling of the Philippeion 


1 Wiegand, Taf. 9. 2 See Fig. 298. 3 Olympia, I, Taf. 41. 


150 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


(Fig. 163). Polygons were a frequent motive in Greek — 
mosaic pavements, if we may judge from the splendid — 
pavement in Nero’s palace at Olympia.’ Disks showing _ 


Fia. 163. — Lozenge decoration of ceiling of the Philippeion, Olympia. — 


the flat side decorated the lintel of the Tholos of Atreus, 
and the epistyle of the Porch of the Maidens in the oS 
Erechtheion ; disks in profile occur with but slight vari- 

ation in form in the bead and reel moulding (aoTtpdyanos). & ; 


Vi ff UN 


Fic. 164. — Bead and reel, also egg and dart, ornament. 


Oval or ovoid forms are seen in the beads of these mould- 
ings and in the egg and dart ornament (Fig. 164). e. 
Running patterns were applied on short and vertical, as — aa 
well as on long, horizontal surfaces. Elaborately carved 
and ornamented zigzags, separated by a running pattern x 
of spirals, decorated the shaft and capital from the Tholos 
of Atreus (Fig. 165). Painted zigzags ornament an ar- cm 
1 Olympia, II, Taf. 108-110, mee 


DECORATION Lot 


chaic sima from the Acropolis at Athens.! The recti- 
linear maeander (palavdpos) occurs in many forms and 
applications. It is not merely a ceil- 
ing decoration (xkéopos Tis dpodikes ) 
as defined by Hesychios, but deco- 
rates also platbands in the bases of col- 
umns, abaci of capitals, and cornices. 
The rectilinear maeander sometimes 
appears .as a disconnected pattern, 
as in cornice of the Treasury of Gela 
(Fig. 166), but more frequently as 
a continuous, or running, pattern. 
The ‘continuous . pattern may be 
simple (Figs. 167, 168), or enlivened 
with ornamental squares or stars 
set at rhythmical intervals, as in 
cornices from Ephesos and from Fre. 165.—Zigzag orna- 
Olympia.? Maeanders with squares, ment from the Tholos 
of Atreus, Mycenae. 

or rosettes, or stars, are usually com- 

posed of two running bands (Fig. 169). More compli- 
cated is the maeander of the wall cornice of the Treasury 


_ Fie. 166. — Maeander from the Treasury of Gela, Olympia. 


of Sikyon (Fig. 170) and that over the Panathenaic frieze 
of the Parthenon, composed of three running bands, and 
enclosing two rows of checkered squares. 

The scroll pattern may be discontinuous, as on the 
great acroterion of the Heraion at Olympia (Fig. 171), 


1 See Fig. 296. 2 Olympia, II, Taf. 118. 


152 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Fic. 167. — Maeander from Olympia. 


geese 


Fic. 168. — Maeander from archaic cornice from Athens. 


Fic. 171. — Scroll pattern from the Heraion. 


DECORATION 153 


or continuous, such as that painted on the hearth of the 
Megaron at Mycenae (Vig. 172), and on a sima from 


Olympia (Fig. 173). This pattern might well be desig- 
nated a curvilinear maeander. The scroll was exceed- 
ingly popular in 
Egyptian art of the 
Middle and New 
Empires; even the 
little palmettes which 
sometimes fill the 
angles in Greek scrolls are c6mmon in Egyptian de- 
signs.! Branching scrolls occur in the necking of capi- 
tals from the Erech- 
theion (Fig. 174). 
Such complicated 
scroll patterns, how- 
ever, were seldom 
used in architectural 
: decoration before the 
Fig. 174.— Scroll pattern from the Erech- late Hellenistic, and 
theion, Athens. Roman, periods. 

Another running pattern, which is found in all periods 
of Greek art, is the guilloche or braid pattern. A discon- 
tinuous, single-band variety occurs on the raking cornices 


from the Old Temple of Athena at Athens (Fig. 175). 


1 Prisse d’ Avennes, Pls. 27-30; Petrie, Figs. 50, 56. 


154 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


The two-band type, however, was more common, even in 
the archaic period. ‘The Acropolis of Athens again fur- 
nishes excellent examples (Figs. 176,177). Even a three; 


band braid arranged in two courses was found among the 
archaic fragments from the Acropolis (Fig. 178). Triple- 
coursed braids occur on the upper torus mouldings of the 


eae OT mm ailtr Doo rH LO tow 
Fic. 176. — Braid pattern from Athens. 


column bases of the North Porch of the Erechtheion.? 
Diapered patterns, composed of the preceding elements, 
were used to decorate broad surfaces like pavements and 


ceilings. Intersecting squares, hexagons, octagons, cir- 
cles and other designs are found in the mosaic pavements 
from the Roman. baths near the Kronion? and from the 
Palace of Nero at Olympia,? and were probably repre- 


1 See Fig. 208. 2 Olympia, II, 182. 3 Ibid., Taf. 108-110. 


DECORATION Loo 


sented earlier in Greek pavements. Diapered spirals are 
found in the well-known carved ceiling of the Tholos at 


pei cae if cil Le 


Orchomenos (Fig. 179), for which Egyptian ceilings! 
undoubtedly furnished the inspiration. 
-Conventionalized floral types were even more character- 


Fig. 179. — Ceiling from Tholos at Orchomenos. 


istic of Greek ornamentation, and included various forms of 
leaves, stems, flowers and fruit. The archaic and classic 


1 Prisse d’Avennes, Pls. 27-80. 


156 GREEK ARCHITECTURE ° 


types of leaf decoration were so conventionalized as to 
suggest little of nature. Identification in such cases is, 
therefore, idle speculation. The most common and char- 
acteristic Doric leaf ornament was that which decorated 


the beak mouldings of anta capitals and cornices. It con- 
sisted of broad, flat leaves, the ends of which were slightly 
rounded. ‘This type of ornament was imported from 
Egypt to Crete in the pre-Mycenaean period.! In the 


classic period, the leaves were usually colored alternately - 


red and blue. Only the central spine suggests the leaf 
origin (Fig. 180). 
Occasionally, as 


| cornice from 
Olympia (Fig. 

. 181), the leaves 
Fia. 181. — Doric leaf pattern trom Olympia. were terminated 


with a strongly rounded arch. More pointed leaves, like 
those of the laurel, were also used, as in some bases from 


the Temple of Apollo near Miletos and the Artemision at— 


Magnesia; and long, lanceolate leaves were used in the 
capitals from the Theatre of Dionysos and in the Tower of 
the Winds at Athens. The so-called “ egg and dart” was 
also treated as a leaf motive. Thus, in the South East 
building at Olympia (Fig. 182) and elsewhere the “ eggs ” 


1G. B.A., XXXVI (1907), 105. 


in a_ terra-cotta — 


DECORATION 157 


are painted with a central spine, and the ‘“ darts” repre- 
sent lanceolate leaves. 
A characteristic decoration in Ionic architecture is the 

. heart-shaped “leaf and dart” upon mouldings having the 

form of the cyma reversa.! 

Aischylos alludes to this 

when he speaks of the 

Lesbian cyma with its I STAVES ESI 

triangular rhythms.? 

Whether sculptured or Fic. 182. — Egg and dart pattern from 

: : Olympia. 

painted, this ornament 

seldom lost its central spine (Fig. 185). Other forms of 

leaves — the olive, the oak with its acorns, ivy and grape 


ee. OR 


Fic. 183. — Ionic leaf pattern from the Acropolis Museum, Athens. 


leaves — occur occasionally. With the development of 
plastic forms a leaf, popularly identified as the acanthus, 


1A.J.A., X (1906), 282-288. ? Fragment 72: ... év rprydvous pudpois. 


158 GREEK ARCHITECTURE: 


gradually assumed a permanent place in Greek decoration. 

It appeared, timidly employed, in the necks of the col- 

umns and in the raking sima of the Erechtheion, and in 

the decoration of the mouldings of the door of the North 

Porch. Iktinos used it in the capital of a column at 

Phigaleia. Polykleitos, the younger, employed it in a 

bolder way in the Tholos at Epidauros, not only in the capi- 

tals of columns, but also ina wall frieze and inasima. In 

the Hellenistic art of Asia Minor and in the Imperial 

temples of Rome the acanthus 

reached the climax of its 

development. It became the 

favorite type of decoration 

for capitals of columns, and 

was frequently used to deco- 

rate the friezes of temples. 

Anacanthus frieze of striking 

character is supposed to have 

once adorned the Temple of 

the Sun at Rome.! More 

Fic. 184. — Rosette pattern from elaborate, and yet exceedingly 

Bey ae beautiful, is the acanthus 

scroll work on the Ara Pacis Augustae at Rome.? Greek 

artists under Trajan continued to employ this type of 

decoration with great skill. Stems (caulieult) entered 

into the acanthus decoration with increasing complexity, 

whether employed to support the volutes of the capitals 

or to serve as the basis for scroll ornament, and reached 

a climax in the elaborate acroteria of the Ionic Temple 
and ‘Trajan’s Temple at Pergamon. 


1d’Espouy, Pl. 63 ; Middleton, IT, 184, note 1. 2 Strong, Pl. 18. 
3 Pergamon, IV, Taf. 40; V, Taf. 15, 


DECORATION 


159 


The rosette was a common type in Greek architec- 
tural ornament. It seems to have been suggested by 


some form in the floral 
world, either: by the lotus,! 
or the daisy, or some com- 
posite flower with radiating 
petals. It was strongly 
conventionalized even in 
the Mycenaean period, as 
may be seen in the carved 
ornamentation from Tiryns 
(Fig. 184), Mycenae, Orcho- 
menos, and Phaistos. In 
the archaic period it was 
treated with great sever- 


MD 
aS 


Fic. 185. — Rosette pattern from Athens, 


ity, aS in the terra-cotta fragments from the Acropo- 


Fic. 186. — Rosette pattern from Epi- 


dauros. 


the rosette are the palmette and the lotus. 


lis at Athens (Fig. 185). 
The better artists of the 
classic period produced 


_ richer forms of rosettes, such 


as those which decorate the 
North Portal of the Erech- 
theion and the metopes of 
the Tholos at Epidauros 
(Fig. 186). From a later 
period are the terra-cotta 
rosettes found in front of 
the Bouleuterion at Olympia 
(Fig. 187). 

Closely associated with 
These two 


1 Goodyear, Figs. 5, 6. 


160 GREEK ARCHITECTU RE 


patterns were so conventionalized as to make their identi- 
fication with specific flowers doubtful; but as both were 
used at a very early date in Egypt it is possible that they 
were suggested by the 
Egyptian lotus.t Some- 
times the two forms are 
so much alike that it is 
difficult to distinguish 
them, but, in general, in 
palmettes the petals, and 
in lotuses the sepals, are 
most strongly marked. 
Archaic examples strongly 
resembled Egyptian proto- 
types. Classic artists made 
Fig. 187. — Rosette pattern from Olym- thege patterns stately and 

te graceful, — witness _ the 
antefixes of the Parthenon, and the column necking, the 
epikranitis, and the sima decoration of the Erechtheion. 
In the Hellenistic period, the favorite type of palmette 
shows S-shaped petals, as, for example, the slender, grace- 
ful antefixes of the Leonidaion at Olympia (Fig. 188). 
Here the petals show not only a double curve in a flat 
plane, but are curved outward into a third dimension of 
space. 

As a running design the palmette and lotus exhibited 
many forms. The patterns were sometimes juxtaposed, 
but not connected, as on some simae from the Acropolis 
at Athens ;? but usually they were united to each other 
by curved stems or bands, as on a sima from one of the 
Treasuries at Olympia (Fig. 189). The normal juncture, 


1 Goodyear, 115-119. - 2 Wiegand, Taf. 9. 


DECORATION 161 


however, was a current spiral, as we see it in examples 
of this ornament from the Erechtheion. The uniting 
bands, as well as the floral patterns, varied consider- 
ably in plastic | 
character as 
well as in linear 
treatment. This 
design was nat- 
urally adapted 
for the orna- 
mentation of 
crowning mem- 
bers, where we 
should expect to 
find the _pat- 
terns set up- 


Meehos he / | 

Greeks did not, \\ We } 

however, hesi- EX BZ 

tate to use it 

as a pendent | 

motive, as, for | 

example, on the 

central mould- Fic. 188. — Palmette pattern from the Leonidaion. 

ing of an ar- 

chaic, or early classic, anta found near the Temple of Apollo 

near Miletos.!.- A popular variety was the form in which 

the patterns were set base to base, lotuses opposed to 

lotuses, palmettes to palmettes, or lotuses to palmettes. 

The sima from Temple C, Selinous, furnishes an early ex- 

ample of the alternating variety (Fig. 190). The cornice 
1 Haussoullier, Pl. 18. 


M 


ie. 


162 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


from Temple F, Selinous,! presents a more developed : 
example of nearly classic design. A late example may be — 
seen at the Temple of Apollo near Miletos,2 where the — 


Fic. 189. — Palmette and lotus pattern from Olympia. 


torus of one of the column bases is thus decorated. Or- a 
dinarily it is the same type of lotus and palmette that. 
recurs in the de- 
sign, but at the 
Temple of Apollo 
near Miletos, sev- 

eral different 


es types were intro- 
iTS duced and re- 
Ph dh 5) 8 SP I ee peated at wide 


Fiac. 190. — Palmette and lotus pattern from Temple intervals. In Ro- Be 
C, Selinous. - 


man decoration 
the acanthus was sometimes used as a running pattern 
resembling the palmette and lotus. ae 

The introduction of flowers, as those on the smaller — 
tendrils of the Erechtheion neck ornament, of acorns, & 
as in the over-door of the Temple of Rome and Augustus — 


1 See Fig. 297. 2 Haussoullier, Pl. 14. . 
3 d’Espouy, Pl. 62. Syste 


DECORATION 163 


at Ancyra, of olives, as in the base of the Column of 
Trajan at Rome, or of pine cones, grapes, or garlands of 
fruit and flowers, seldom occurred before the Hellenistic 
or Roman period. 

Zoomorphie designs did not figure largely in Greek 
decoration. On the archaic sculptures from the Acro- 
polis at Athens we find eagle feathers and serpent scales! 


represented by the same pattern. This was also employed 


upon the echinus of an archaic Athenian capital. Entire 
animals were sometimes employed as ornament, as the 
eagles beneath the raking cornice of the old Athena 
Temple® on the Acropolis, the eagles and the owls on 
the frieze of the Propylaia at Pergamon,‘ or the griffins 
which capped the gable ends of the Temple of Aphaia 
at Aegina. But animal heads were more commonly em- 
ployed in this way. Such were the bucrania, or ox 
heads, which passed from Egyptian into Mycenaean. art 
and became a common motive in Hellenistic and Roman 
decoration, also the lon heads, used as water spouts and 
as mere decoration on the simae of Greek temples of every 
period. 

Anthropomorphic decoration is exemplified by the 
Maidens (xépar), which stood as columns in the Treasury 
of the Knidians at Delphi,® and the Porch of the Maidens 
at Athens; and the Telamones, or Giants, which served as 
decorative supports in the Temple of Zeus at Akragas. 
Human masks also were employed decoratively, as in the 
archaic temple antefixes for the Greek cities of southern 
Italy (Fig. 191). Inthe Hellenistic period human bodies 
or masks were associated with acanthus foliage, as in the 


1 Wiegand, Taf. 3-5. 2 Durm, 91. 8 Wiegand, Taf. 1-3. 
4 Pergamon, II, Taf. 29. 5 See Fig. 221. 


164 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


decoration of the Artemision at Magnesia and of the Temple 
of Apollonear Miletos.! ‘ This type of decoration reached its 
climax in the beautful reliefs from Trajan’s Forum.” Vari- 


Fig. 191. — Archaic antefix in A. M. private collection. 


ous products of art and industry, such as vases, candelabra, 
trophies, and imaginary architecture entered into Hellen- 
istic decoration, but became much more common under 
the Romans. . 
Mythological motives abound in Greek decoration. To 
treat of these adequately would be to write the history 
of Greek sculpture and painting, for pediments, metopes, 
friezes, wall paintings, and pictorial reliefs exhibited 
mythological compositions almost exclusively. Some- 
times, as in the Parthenon and the Temple of Zeus at 
Olympia, the subjects selected were more or less closely 


associated with the divinity to whom the temple was ded-- 


icated, but frequently they seem to be quite irrelevant.® 


1 Haussoullier, Pl. 16. 2 Alinari photographs, Nos. 6342-6345. 
® Tarbell and Bates, A./.A., VIII (1893), 18-27. 


Pe Soe ee eRe be ee bp 


DECORATION 165 


As with geometrical and floral ornament, so here certain 
fixed types became popular and were repeated as pure 
decoration. Such subjects as the Labors of Herakles, 
of Theseus, contests of Gods and Giants, Lapiths and 
Centaurs, or Greeks and Amazons, were frequently used 
with as little regard to significance as was the palmette or 
the lotus. 

3. DECORATION OF FOUNDATIONS, PAVEMENTS, AND 
WALLS. — It is sometimes assumed that Greek decoration 
never failed in being properly adapted to architectural 
forms, but a study in detail of the application of Greek 
ornament will disprove this assumption. It is important, 


therefore, that we should be acquainted not merely with 


the motives which make up the repertoire of the Greek 
decorator, but also with the principles by which he was 
guided in the decoration of each architectural detail. We 
may follow the same order as in our consideration of archi- 
tectural forms, treating first of foundations and walls with 
their openings, then of piers and columns and their entab- 
latures, then of roofs and ceilings. 

The foundations of a Greek building, when more than a 
mere projecting socle, consisted of a stepped krepidoma 
or of a raised podium. In archaic and classic buildings a 
severe type of krepidoma prevailed, which was left undec- 
orated. In the wings of the Propylaia at Athens, beneath 
the three-stepped krepidomas and to mark their separation 
from the supporting walls below, we find a dark course of 
Eleusinian stone; but in later buildings, each step was 
separated from the other by deep lines of shadow, produced 
by undercutting the lower edge of each step, as in the 
Leonidaion at Olympia (Fig. 192). In the Philippeion 
(Fig. 193) the process of individualization was carried still 


1 GS 10 gee 
? ~ z 


166 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


farther, for not only were the edges of each step undercut, 
but each block had a complete anathyrosis. This produced 
the effect of breaking each 
step into a series of inde- 
pendent blocks, and thus 
weakened its appearance 

as a foundation. 
Fig. 192. — Steps from the Leonidaion, In the case of podia, the 
ee ia Jee base and crowning mould- 
ings sometimes received the principal decoration. In the 
podium of the Monument of Lysicrates each course of blocks 
composing the die had 
a marginal drafting at 
its base which served 


to decorate it by @ pe === SSS SSS 

, : Be Sess Berens 
series of horizontal eee 
lin hadow. h , 

— of shadow The Fic. 193. — Steps from the Philippeion, 
podium of the Mauso- Olympia. 


leion at Halikarnassos 
and that of the Great Altar at Pergamon were decorated 
with sculptured friezes and with elaborate base and 
cornice mouldings. | 
Pavements were decorated in various ways. At Tiryns 
and Mycenae pavements of concrete were ornamented 
with scratched lines forming geometrical patterns; at 
Phaistos (Fig. 194) and Hagia Triada large slabs of 
gypsum were so arranged and separated by lines of red 
stucco as to form a regular design; at Priene! pebbles 
laid alternately flat and on edge were arranged in regular 
patterns. In Greek temples marble pavements were laid 
so as to emphasize the front, or the long sides, or to 


1 Priene, 177. 


‘ 
(ao de en eee 


DECORATION 


167 


give all sides of the peristasis equal importance. Highly 
decorative and figured mosaic pavements did not appear 


before the Hellenistic or the 
Roman period. ‘The earliest 


of these, that in the pronaos of - 


the Zeus temple at Olympia,} 
with its geometric and floral 
borders, suggests the pattern 
of arug. Pompeian mosaics 
sometimes exhibited elaborate 
pictorial compositions. 

An unusual kind of deco- 
ration is found in the Temple 
of Athena at Priene. Here 
the doors to the naos swing 
inward and were guided by 
euryved channels sunk in the 


Fig. 194. — Pavement from the palace 
at Phaistos. 


pavement (Figs. 195, 196). These channels are carved 


Fig 195.— Door-tracks from the Temple of Athena, 


Priene. 


continuity of their surface, by the 


on either side in- 


to fasciae, which 


add charm to the 


/otherwise awk- 


ward clefts in 
the pavement. 
Walls were 
decorated in va- 
rious ways: by 
breaks in the 
concealment of 


structure, by the emphasis of structure, by base, central 
and crowning mouldings, and by wall pictures. Wall 


1 Olympia, IT, 180, Taf. 105; Blouet, I, Pls. 63-64. 


168 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


surfaces, if continuously unbroken, are wearisome from 
their monotony. In fortifications bastions and towers 
served to break this monotony. In the wall of the Lele- 
ges near Jassos in 
Caria,! the con- 


7/7 tinuity of the wall 
Vf was broken by 
Fic. 196. — Profile of door-tracks from the Temple vertical set-backs, 
? of Athena, Priene. deep enough to 
have been useful 
in flanking an enemy. But at Troy, Mycenae, and else- 
where, the vertical set-backs are so slight as to serve no 
useful purpose beyond that of breaking the monotony 
of the continuous walls. Similar to these, but more deco- 
rative, are the pilasters set at rhythmical intervals around 
the hypaethral courts of the Temple of Apollo near Mile- 
tos. Horizontal set-backs similarly broke the monotony 
of continuously vertical walls. 


A second method of decorating walls was to conceal 


their structure. In Greece, as well as elsewhere, stucco 
revetments concealed poorly constructed walls and served 
as a ground for superficial ornamentation. Marble revet- 
ments, varied in color or pattern, decorated the facade of 
the Tholos of Atreus at Mycenae, the palace of Mausolos 
at Halikarnassos, and the public buildings of Alexandria. 
In the pre-Mycenaean palace at Knossos, as well as in 
Hellenistic and Roman private houses at Delos and 
Pompeii, marble revetments were imitated in painted 
stucco. In buildings of the classic period, the walls 
were jointed as finely as possible so as to produce the 


effect of a monolithic mass, in which the actual con- 


1 Texier, III, Pl. 147. 


DECORATION 169 


struction from relatively small blocks was concealed from 
view. 

A third type of wall decoration consisted in the empha- 
sis of structure. In the Museum at Candia there are a 
number of small glazed plaques, from Knossos,! which 
picture several types of houses. In some of these empha- 
sis is given to the regular courses of masonry set in hori- 
zontal courses with alternating joints; others represent 
half-timbered construction. A similar emphasis of struc- 
ture is exhibited in the archaic fragments from the 
Acropolis, which portray the oldest Erechtheion.2 Here 
walls are represented in which every block is marked by 
a complete anathyrosis. In the classic period, heavy walls, 
such as those of fortresses, were composed of blocks which 
were carefully dressed at the borders. But for finely 
constructed walls smoothly dressed blocks without mar- 
ginal draftings were preferred. In some cases where 
these still persist, as in the Propylaia at Athens, the walls 
may be considered as unfinished. In later buildings, 
however, marginal draftings were left for aesthetic 
effect. In the pedestal of the Choragic Monument of 
Lysicrates only the horizontal joints have marginal 
draftings. At Magnesia on the Maeander, at Priene 
(Fig. 197), and elsewhere the vertical joints were very 
strongly emphasized and the faces of the blocks slightly 
rounded. An extreme limit was reached by the Byzantines, 
who did not hesitate in some cases to point their walls 
with gold. 

A fourth method of wall decoration consisted in the 
adornment of the base, body, and crowning mouldings. 
Wall bases usually presented a socle and orthostatai, 


1 B.S.A., VIII (1901-1902), 14-22. 2 Wiegand, Taf. 14. 


170 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


which we have considered as formal characters. But 
the broad, almost unbroken surface of the orthostatai 
contrasted with the detailed play of lines in the masonry 
above and thus be- 
came a part of the i 
wall decoration.  — 
To the present day, : 
a dado is an aes- 
thetic rather than 
| a practical neces- 
~ sity. Beneath the 
orthostatai, in 
buildings of the 
-Jonic order, were 
usually a series of 
mouldings. ‘These 
mouldings in the~ 
Treasury of the 
Phocaeans~ at. 
Delphi? and in the 
|) Temple of Athena 
Fic. 197. — Wall from Priene. Nike at Athens, 

3 repeated the deco- a 
ration as well as form of the base mouldings of the 
columns. In other cases, as in the Erechtheion, anta Be 
and column bases were emphasized by more richly 
decorated mouldings. The body of walls in archaic 
and classic buildings was seldom broken by string 
courses. The white marble town walls of Thasos?2 were, 
however, decorated with a horizontal band of black stone, 


ye ee 


“co ahaa Sk 


et he ee! ee ed Pee © oo eae 


1 Homolle, Le Temple d’ Athéna Pronaia, 10. : 
2 Perrot et Chipiez, VIII, 17. 


inh A NN a ak a ak i tie a a i kd fei i le 
aot ‘- is H . 
: 


DECORATION a al 


and in the Pinakotheke of the Propylaia at Athens, the 
blue Eleusinian stone of the window-sills was continued 
along the side walls. At a later period architects more 
frequently broke the monotony of vertical walls by string 
courses, as in the fagade of the Temple of Zeus at Aizanoi.! 

The crowning mouldings of walls were usually more 


ae 


IONE \ V/V ON 


Fig. 198. - oe Bpikranitis from the Temple of Aphaia, ‘Aegina. 


PW DOSTKZINS 


highly decorated than those of the base. In the Treasury 
of Sikyon at Olympia, which is a vaos év mapactaow, the 
triglyphal frieze and cornice with mutules was continued 
around the outer walls of the cella, while the interior 
walls were capped by a platband surmounted with a beak 
moulding. In the Temple of Aphaia at Aegina (Fig. 198) 
the platband was adorned with a scroll and lotus pattern 
of severe but interesting design. The epikranitis of the 
exterior of the cella walls of the Parthenon (Fig. 199) 
was more complicated. Above the well-known sculp- 
tured frieze was a cyma reversa decorated with the Les- 
bian leaf and dart; above this a broad platband ornamented 


’ with a double-coursed maeander, and a beak moulding with 


the usual Doric leaf pattern. In some [onic buildings, 


1 Texier, I, Pl. 30. 


ghar): GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


like the Temple of Athena Nike and the Erechtheion, an 
entire entablature with epistyle, frieze, and cornice was 
continued around the building above the regular epi- 
kranitis. In all these examples the real epikranitis con- 


|: saa 


VA VW v sw, 


Fic. 199. — Epikranitis from the Parthenon. 


sisted of a decorated platband, surmounted by painted or 


carved mouldings. ‘The platband would seem to repre- — 


sent the wall plates which bound together the studs and 
corner posts of a frame building. In stone and marble 
buildings, this band with its decoration served an aesthetic 


purpose of a similar character. In the Hellenistic and 


Roman periods, the. platband of the epikranitis was often 
decorated with some form of acanthus scroll, as in the 
Augusteum at Ancyra. An unusual, but not altogether 
successful, type of decoration was adopted in the temple 
of Mars Ultor at Rome,! where the epikranitis imitates a 
coffered ceiling. 

A fifth method of wall decoration was by means of 
color. In the Thalamegos of Ptolemy Philopator? the 

1 d’Espouy, Pl. 52. 2 Athenaios, Deipnos., V, 206. 


DECORATION its 


walls of the dining hall were decorated with alternate 
bands of dark- and light-colored alabaster. The palace of 
Mausolos at Halikarnassos was ornamented with polychro- 
matic marble revetments. The stuccoed walls of private 
houses, palaces, market-places, and temples afforded an 
excellent field for the display of the painter’s art. The 
palaces at Knossos, Tiryns, and Mycenae have preserved 
interesting examples from the earliest period. The figured 
wall paintings of Polygnotos, Mikon, and other artists of 
the classic period are lost, but the paintings of a later period 
which have survived from Pompeii and Herculaneum were 
designed to imitate marble walls, puasters, and cornices, 
or to produce fantastic architectural effects, or to portray 
historical, mythological, or other such scenes. These paint- 
ings, as a rule, harmonized well with the character of the 
building they were intended to decorate. 

4. DECORATION OF Doors, WINDOWS, ANTAE, AND 
PILASTERS. — Doors and windows were sometimes left as 
mere openings without decoration. ‘This is especially true 
of the gateways and windows of well-constructed fortifi- 
cations. But sills, lintels, and jambs set flush with 
the walls or shghtly projecting were, from time immemo- 
rial, a means not only of protecting but also of decorating 
wall openings. Where severity of treatment was required, 
as in the agora at Aegae,! jambs and lintels were left with- 
out special decoration. But decorative forms were also 
given to door and window-frames. Sometimes jambs 
and lintels were recessed by a series of successive fasciae 
(xdpoat), as in the tomb of Atreus at Mycenae or in the 
entrance to the theatre at Aizanoi. Lintels projecting 
beyond the jambs were used by the Greeks of Asia Minor, 


1 Bohn-Schuchhardt, Figs. 16, 17, 24. 


174 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


as well as by the Etruscans. They occur in the western — 
windows of the Erechtheion (Fig. 200), where they are — 
emphasized by terminal mouldings. They are prescribed = 
by Vitruvius.) In — 
a rock-cut tomb at 
Antiphellos, the sill, 
as well as the lintel, 
was thus decorated. — 
The doorways of the 
Parthenon and those ~ 
-of the Propylaia at— 

Athens seem to have — 
been decorated with 
bronze revetments. 
Richly carved deco- | 
ration characterized 
the North Door of | 
the Erechtheion 
| (Fig. § 201)... Heres 

the outermost fascia was framed by bead and reel mould- 
ings and decorated by a series of rosettes. The second 
fascia had a more noteworthy decoration in the acanthus 
leaf and dart carved upon its cyma reversa moulding. 
This is, perhaps, the earliest example of this type — 
of decoration. Doorways recessed with a series of fasciae — % | 
occur so frequently on the facades of Lycian tombs as = 
to lead us to believe that wooden doorways of houses 
and public buildings were similarly constructed from the Es 
light timber which alone was available in that country. oe 
Porches were often built in front of doorways opening 
on thoroughfares, and windows were provided with hoods 


1 Vitruvius, IV, 6, 2. 


Fig. 200.— Western window, Erechtheion. 


¥ 


DECORATION abies 


Fic. 201. — North door of the Erechtheion. 


176 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


as a protection from sun or rain; hence followed nat- 
urally the columnar decoration of doorways, as in the 
Tholos of Atreus, and of windows, as in the Pinakotheke 
on the Acropolis at Athens;! hence also door cornices 
resting on consoles or brackets (aapatis, ayx@v, ots), 
as in the North Porch of the Erechtheion. When a 
cornice with consoles was applied to a door-frame the 
lintel of which projected beyond the jambs, as in the 
Temple of Herakles at Cori,? the effect was less pleas- 
ing. 

A word may be said about the decoration of the doors 
themselves. As already noticed, these were constructed 
so as to exhibit a series of panels, which were surrounded 
by mouldings, and decorated by such symbols as bolts,? lion 
heads* (Acovtoxégarar), or Gorgon heads (Topyovera).® 
We may well believe that, even in the archaic period, tem- 
ple doorways were sheathed with figured bronze reliefs of 
similar character to those known as Argive reliefs, and 
that, in the classic and Hellenistic periods, decorated 
bronze doors continued to be used. Doors of carved wood, 
and of marquetry were also probably employed by the 
Greeks, and chryselephantine doors are recorded for the 
Temple of Athena at Syracuse.® 

Antae, pilasters, and engaged columns received a deco- 
ration related to that of the walls or columns. Their 
bases, in the Doric order, were plain socles and orthosta- 
tai. In the Ionic order they received decorative mould- 
ings similar to those of the walls in the Vemple of Athena 
Nike at Athens, and in the Treasury of the Phocaeans 


1 Bohn, Taf. 9. 4 Texier, III, Pl. 174. 
2 Mauch, Taf. 56. 5 Cicero, Verr. IV, 56. 
8 Texier, III, Pl. 169. 6 Tbid. 


DECORATION The 


at Delphi. Sometimes, on the other hand, their decora- 
tion contrasted with that of the walls. Thus, in the 
North Porch of the Erechtheion, they are ornamented to 
correspond not with the walls but with the columns, and 
show a similar triple 
braid,- with this inter- 
-esting distinction — the 
pilaster bases have 
flowers in the centre 
and at the corners. 

The shafts of antae 
and pilasters, in the 
early period, were deco- 
rated as walls or wall 
coverings. In © later 
times they often had 
an independent deco- 
ration. Uhus, for. ex- 
ample, in the monument 
of Philopappos at 
Athens, they were 
panelled, but as a rule 
they were channelled. 
Engaged columns in the Fic. 202. — Anta capital from Aegina. 
Tomb of Atreus at 
Mycenae were decorated with elaborate zigzags, obviously 
in imitation of metal sheathing, but ordinarily they 
were decorated with channellings. 

The capitals of antae and pilasters in the earlier periods 
were decorated to correspond with the epikranitis of the 
wall. In general, this decoration consisted of a platband 


1 Stuart and Revett, III, Ch. V, Pl. 3. 


178 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


surmounted by a cornice moulding. In the Doric order 
the platband was usually left undecorated, as in the rep- 
resentative series of buildings at Olympia.! The crown- 
ing moulding was painted with the Doric leaf pattern. 
A typical instance is 
that of the Temple of 
Aphaia at Aegina (Fig. 
7 F 202). In Attic build- 
(eae ee ings, as, for example, in 
ile NS {| the Parthenon (Fig. 
JTUUIUIOIUIGIL. 208 or in the temple 
CWKOWOMUMMCNHONC + at Sounion, mouldings 
with carved decoration 
were placed beneath the 
painted beak mouldings. 
The abacus in the Doric 
order was usually un- 
decorated, but in the 
Ionic it received crown- 

ing mouldings. 
In the Ionic order the 
Fic. 203.— Anta capital from the Par- yeck of the capital was 
3 pet given some form of 
sculptured ornament: rosettes in the Propylon of the 
Stoa at Pergamon;? palmettes and lotus flowers in 
the Temple of Athena Nike and the Erechtheion ;® scroll 
work in the theatre at Miletos. Above the neck a series 
of mouldings was also carved. Even the crowning 
moulding of the abacus was provided with sculptured 

ornament. 


1 Olympia, II, 184. | 2 See Fig. 205. 
3 Stuart and Revett, II, Ch. I, Pl. 18. 


DECORATION 179 


In the Hellenistic period, capitals of antae and pilasters 
were frequently assimilated in decoration to the capitals 
of columns. In 
the Temple of 
Apollo near 
Miletos (Fig. 
204) the pilaster 
capitals had un- 
developed  vo- 
lutes. The 
channelled vo- 
lutes and con- 
necting bands 
were decorated with olive leaf, or scale ornament, and 
rosettes. The central space between the volutes was 
filled with an acanthus scroll’ between two griffins, and 


Fic. 204. — Pilaster capital from the Temple of Apollo, 
Miletos. 


Fic. 205. — Anta capital from the Propylon at 
Pergamon. 


_.the abacus capped with an egg and dart moulding. 
On the, anta capitals of the Propylon of the Stoa at 
Pergamon (Fig. 205) are fully developed volutes and 
echinus. In the Augusteum at Ancyra (Fig. 206), 
the acanthus and winged genii dominate the decoration of 


SSS eae 


GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


180 


cyra. 


1 ih ‘ \ 


Anta capital from 


Fig. 206. — 


4 ra 
E. Guillaume del. 


DECORATION 181 


the anta capitals, connecting them not only with the cap- 
itals of the columns but also with the epikranitis of the 
wall. 

5. DECORATION OF CoLUMNS. — Columns varied not 
merely in form, but also in decoration, and their bases, 
shafts, and capitals all shared in furnishing decorative 
charm. The torus mouldings of column bases were 
usually left plain, but in Asiatic Greece were often deco- 


Fic. 207. — Column base from early and late Temple of Hera at 
Samos. 


rated. In the Temple of Athena at Priene! those bases 
which are protected from the weather have their mould- 
ings decorated with horizontal channellings, while the 
bases of the peristyle are channelled only on the lower 
half of their torus mouldings. The earliest architects of 
the Temple of Hera at Samos (Fig. 207), and those of the 


1 See Fig. 80. 


182 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Temple of Nike and the Erechtheion at Athens, were less 
practical in their methods, and, even for the exterior order, 
channelled the upper as well as the lower half of the torus 
mouldings. The horizontal channelling emphasized the 
base as distinct from the vertical support. This type of 
decoration must have appealed strongly to the Greeks of 
Asia Minor, for it was employed there for several cen- 
turies. In the column bases of the North Porch of the 
Erechtheion the upper toruses were decorated with a braid 
ornament, which on the two columns at the angles was 
formed by concave bands, and on the remaining bases of 
the porch by convex bands (Fig. 208). These may have 
been rendered still more effective by the insertion of 
enamel.! Hermogenes used the scale, or laurel leaf, pat- 


Fie. 208.— Column base from North Porch of Erechtheion. 


tern to decorate bases of the Temple of Artemis at Mag- 
nesia, and the architects of the fagade of the Temple 
of Apollo near Miletos* employed a series of different 


| 
1K, A. Gardner, Ancient Athens, 369. 
2 Records of the Past, 1V (1905), 3-15. 


DECORATION 1838 


motives to decorate the column bases of that temple 
ei, 209), 

The shafts of columns were sometimes left undecorated. 
In some cases, as at Segesta, this is evidently to be ac- 
counted for by the unfinished state of the buildings. In 


\! 


Fic. 209. — Column base from the Temple of Apollo near Miletos. 


other cases, as in the Arsenal at the Peiraieus,! considera- 
tions of economy dispensed with decoration as unnecessary. 
Channelling (faS8dwo1s) was almost the exclusive type 
of decoration employed by Greek architects for column 
shafts from the earliest to the latest period. In most 
cases, the channelling was carried completely around the 


1 Frazer, Paus., II, 16. 


184 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


shaft. It was, however, sometimes confined to the front 
or visible sides of shafts, as, for example, in the Treasury 
of the Megarians at Olympia, and sometimes to the upper 
portion of shafts, as in the Stoa of Attalos at Athens. 
Private houses of the Hellenistic and Roman period at 
Delos, Priene, and Pompeii bear witness to the growing 
tendency to leave the lower portion of shafts unchannelled. 
The Greeks of the classic period preferred channellings 
which followed the vertical line of the shaft, but more 
freedom was displayed both in the earlier and later 
periods. A Hellenistic relief in the Naples Museum! and 
a sarcophagus from Asia Minor? may be cited as examples 
of spiral channellings, which became a favorite type for 
the columns of Christian churches of all periods. ‘The 
technical execution of channellings required considerable 


skill. Vitruvius? lays down rules for the designing of — 


Doric and Ionic channellings, in both cases assuming them 
to be of circular section. But Greek channellings were 
not always circular. In the columns of the so-called 
Temple of Demeter at Paestum* they were elliptical, and 
in the columns of the Temple of Apollo at Phigaleia® 
they take the form of a three-centred arch. Greek 
columns were not perfect cylinders, but exhibited the 
qualities of diminution and entasis, hence the form and 
width of the channelling varied from the base to the 
summit of the shaft. The number of channellings soon 
became fixed at twenty for Doric, and twenty-four for 
Ionic columns; but there were many exceptions to this 


1 Schreiber, Hell. Reliefb., Taf.54. 
2 Strzygowski, Byz. Denkm., III, Figs. 1, 2. 
8 Vitruvius, IV, 3, 9; III, 5, 14. 
4 Koldewey and Puchstein, 19. 5 Cockerell, Pl. 13. 


DECORATION 185 


rule. Archaic Ionic columns, such as those of the Temple 
of Artemis at Ephesos,! had as many as forty-four channel- 
lings. Some late Ionic buildings, as the Leonidaion at 
Olympia, have columns with only twenty channellings. 
Similarly, in Doric buildings, examples might be cited of 
twenty-eight and twenty-four channellings at Paestum, 
eighteen at Orchomenos in Arcadia,” sixteen at Syracuse 
and at Sounion, and twelve at Tegea.2 The shallow 
‘ channellings of Doric columns were separated from each 
other by sharp arrises, and the deeper channellings of the 
Ionic order by flat arrises, or fillet mouldings. The ratio 
of the width of the channelling to the separating arris# 
varied from 8:1 to 5:1. The termination of the chan- 
nelling at the upper and lower ends of the shaft exer- 
cised the ingenuity of Greek architects. In the angle 
columns of the so-called Temple of Demeter at Paestum 
(Fig. 210) the channellings 

terminate on the shaft against 

a fillet, becoming shallower as 

they ascend and having a flat 

elliptical contour, and a small 

leaf ornament between the 

channellings. Other columns Fie. 210. — Column channellings 
of the same temple have chan- ae ioc ake een Scat ba 

3 aestum, 

nellings which die away against 

a roundel moulding. In the Parthenon (Fig. 211), as in 
Doric columns of the classic period in general, the channel- 
lings are carried through the neck of the capital and die 
away with an almost horizontal contour against the annuli. 
In later columns, as those of the Stoa at Pergamon (Fig. 


1 Hogarth, 267. 3 Ath. Mitt., VIII (1883), 284. 
2 Frazer, Paus., 1V, 226. 4 Marini, III, 3, note 31. 


186 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


212), the channellings do not become shallower, but are car- 


ried abruptly against the annuli of the capital. In Ionic 


and Corinthian  col- 
umns the channellings 


Fic. 211.— Column channellings from the 
Parthenon. 


terminate usually in a 
semicircular contour 
and die away before or 
after the apophyge of 


columns, such as those 
of the Forum ‘Trian- 


gulare at Pompeii, frequently exhibit channe nies with 


abrupt terminations like those 
of the Stoa at Pergamon. 
The channellings themselves, 
in late buildings, sometimes 
received special decoration, 
as, for example, small vases 
at the Temple of Zeus at 
Aizanol (Fig. 213), or disks 


at the gymnasium at Solunto.! 


| 


vA 


Fig. 213. — Column channellings from 
the Temple of Zeus, Aizanoi. 


Fig. 212.— Column channellings 
from Pergamon. 


Even the arrises were 
decorated in the Erech- 
theion (Fig. 214) by an 
added moulding at the 
crown. What the origin 
of the Greek channelling 
may have been is not 
perfectly evident. The 
Egyptians had channelled 


columns a thousand years before we find them at Mycenae. 


1 Photograph No. 238, by G. Incorpora, Palermo. 


the shaft begins. Late” 


‘ee ae” a: *, 
A Ge ee RE Ee eae +e 


é . 
ii 


DECORATION 187 


At the tombs of Benihassan, the channelled columns with 
their play of light and shade have a greater charm than the 
polygonal shafts with flat faces. The Greeks also were 
not blind to the aesthetic effects of channelling. To 
describe it Aristotle} 
used the word paBdwars, 
which emphasizes their 
continuous vertical 
character. These verti- 
cal lines counteract the 


- effect of the horizontal 


joints of the drums, 

when they become visi- 

ble. Vitruvius? reasoned . 
that, by means of chan- | | 


nellings, columns might 
be made to appear 
broader, and that the 
slenderer columns of an 
inner order might in this way be made apparently equal 
to those of the exterior. According to modern writers, 
the object of channelling is to make columns appear 
slenderer, and to avoid the appearance of flatness and of 
variable proportions, to which an unchannelled shaft is 
subject when variously lighted. 

Other modes of decorating the shafts of columns occur 
exceptionally, but deserve mention. Mycenaean gems, 
an archaic poros shaft * in the Acropolis Museum, and the 
support of a tripod from Plataia® exhibit spiral windings, 


Fic. 214.— Column channellings from the 
Erechtheion. 


1 Nic. Eth. 10, 4, 2. 3 Uhde, I, 185-1386. 
2 Vitruvius, IV, 4, 1-4. * Belger in Arch. Anz., 1895, 15. 
5 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Donarium, Fig. 2529. 


188 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the broad portions of which are convex and not con- 
cave, as in ordinary channellings. Convex flutings also 


Hh 
I 
H i} 
iH 
} 
Ih § 
| iif 
} | 
i | 
t } 
I ii} 1 
\ j | 
ily i} | 
4 Hit 1 
| 
i} iy 


Fig. 215. — Channellings 
*from the Tower of the 
Winds, Athens. 


| 
| 
! 


occur on the lower portion of the en- 
gaged columns in the interior of the 
Tower of the Winds (Fig. 215), and 
were not uncommon in Pompeii. In 
the columns of the Choragic Monnu- 
ment of Lysicrates (Fig. 216) the 
channellings at the top of the shaft 

die away, and the arrises become the — 
central spines of a lanceolate leaf or- 
nament. When we consider the 
frequency with which reed bundle 
columns occur in Egypt and that 
they were in actual use over a large 


part of the Orient, it seems strange that reeded columns 


do not occur more frequently 
in Greek architecture. Chan- 
nelling was usually carried 
from the base to the top of 
the shaft, but, even in the 
archaic period, a _ partial 
channelling was attempted, 
as in the colwmnae caelatae 
of the Temple of Artemis 
at Ephesos,! where the lowest 
drums were sculptured with 
figured decorations. ‘The 
same method of decoration 


CA GN eae 


Fig. 216.—Channellings from the 
Monument of Lysicrates, Athens. 


was employed in the fourth-century restoration of that 
temple (Fig. 217). Athenaios? tells us that the shafts in 


1 Murray in J.H.S., X (1889), 8. 


2 Deipnos., V, 206. 


rete ee eo 


DECORATION 189 


the dining hall of the Thalamegos of Ptolemy Philopator 
were built up with drums of white marble alternating 


ee 


Fic, 217. — Sculptured Drums from the Temple of Artemis, 
Ephesos. 


with black, which, with the similarly decorated walls in 
the same hall, constitute the beginnings of a system of 
decoration which later Byzantine and Italian artists de- 


190 GREEK ARCHITECTURE © 


veloped into a national style. Athenaios! also makes 
mention of shafts decorated with inlaid marble or precious 
stones. ‘The decoration of columns and piers with mosaic, 
as exemplified in Pompeii and in Byzantine churches, was 


in all probability found in Greek buildings of the Hellen- — 


istic period. Carved or painted tablets (otvAomivdxia) 


decorated the columns of the Temple of Apollo at Kyzikos.? 


These later instances of polychromatic shafts raise the 
question how far shafts of columns were colored in earlier 
times. ‘The present rusty coloring of Pentelic marble 
shafts is insufficient evidence to lead us to believe with 


Semper? that they were originally painted a warm, rich © 


red. That the stuccoed shafts of the archaic period and 
_ the marble shafts of the classic period were left white, as 
Kugler believed, is probable in some instances. On the 
other hand, there appears to be substantial evidence 
that the earliest marble columns, and even those of the 
Theseion and the Parthenon, were covered with a thin 


coating of color.4. This coloring matter fused with wax 


served to protect the surface of the marble and perhaps also 
give to it the appearance of ivory. The shafts of the pro- 
skenion of the theatre at Priene were painted red, while 
those of the Palaistra at Olympia were probably yellow.® 


A common decoration of the Doric shaft consisted in — a 
the incised annuli at the upper end of the shaft. An 


elementary example occurs in the columns of Temple D 
at Selinous (Fig. 218). Here the lower end of the cap- 
ital block was chamfered so as to protect the arrises of 


1 Deipnos., XII, 514. 

2 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Columna, 1346. 

8 Semper, Vorlduf. Bemerk., 48. 

4 Hittorff, 44-45. 5 Olympia, II, 184. 


eneres 


¢. 


DECORATION 191 


the channelling from injury when being set in place. 
The ornamental character of this incision was recognized 
at once and the number of annuli increased. In the 


Fic. 219.— Annuli from 
Fie. 218.—Incised annulus the Treasury of Gela, 
from Temple D, Selinous. Olympia. 


Treasury of Gela at Olympia (Fig. 219) the shafts have 
four of these incised annuli; the temples of Poseidon at 
Paestum, of Apollo at Corinth, and several of the treas- 
uries of Olympia show three incised annuli. These annuli 
were usually composed of two plane surfaces meeting 
at an angle; or separated by a fillet 
moulding. In the Temple of Apollo 
at Phigaleia (Fig. 220), and of 
Aphaia at Aegina, curved surfaces 
are employed in the construction of 
the annuli. The architects of the 
Parthenon and of the Propylaia 
reduced the number of annuli to one 


Fic. 220.— Annuli from 
Phigaleia. 


and were content with plane surfaces. In the Hellen- 


istic period, this feature of the Doric shaft disappears 
altogether. 

The shafts of square pillars in the earlier periods, 
as in the Choragic Monument of Thrasyllos at Athens, 
were left undecorated. In the Hellenistic and Roman 
periods, their decoration was usually borrowed from that 


192 


of the columns. Chan- 
nelling, partial or com- 
plete, was the normal 
type, as in the Tomb 
at Mylasa.! Figures 
in high relief decorated 
the piers of the upper 
story of the so-called 
Incantada at Thessa- 
lonica.? 
Anthropomorphiec 
supports were usually 
in the form of maidens 
(xdpat) bearing baskets 
or other burdens on 
their heads(xavndopot), 
and were described by 
Vitruvius? as Caryat- 
ides. The Treasuries 
of Knidos (Fig. 221) 
and of Siphnos at Del- 
phi present this type in — 
its earliest and most 
characteristic form. 
The heavy neck, rein- 
forced by the hanging 
locks of hair, the broad 
draperies and the 


1 Jon. Antig., IT, Pl. 24. > 

2 Stuart and Revett, III, 
Ch. IX, Pls. 6-18. 

8 Vitruvius, I, 1, 5. 


Fig. 221. — Kanephoros from Knidian Treas- 
ury, Delphi. 


DECORATION 193 


rigid pose gave the female form apparent strength to 
support its heavy burden. In the Porch of the Maidens 
of the Erechtheion, similar devices were employed. Male 
figures appear also as supports (dtXavtes, TeXNawaves), in 
rigid pose, at the Olympieion at Akragas, and, crouching, 


Fic. 222. — Neck of capital from Mycenae. 


beneath the Neronian stage platform in the Theatre of 
Dionysos at Athens.! ; 

Capitals of columns were decorated upon the neck, 
principal moulding, and abacus. Neck mouldings, as we 
have seen, did not constitute an invariable part of the 
Greek capital. They varied in form, and their decoration 
was determined by no fixed canon. In the Mycenaean 
capital from the Tomb of Atreus (Fig. 222) the slightly 
concave neck was decorated by a series of round-headed 
leaves, and in an ivory colonnette from Mycenae? the 


1 Photograph by Bonfils, No. 527. 2 Perrot et Chipiez, VI, Fig. 204. 
. re) 


194 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


channellings were carried through the neck to the prin- 
cipal moulding. The archaic columns of the Enneastylos 
and the so-called Temple of Demeter at Paestum (Figs. 
223, 224°) show deeply concave necks decorated with flat 
arched or rectilinearly terminated leaves which sometimes 
show spikes between their rounded ends and sometimes 
curve over to form a bead moulding. In the Monument 


Fig. 223.— Neck of capital from Fic. 224.—Neck of capital from 
Paestum. Paestum. 


of Lysicrates at Athens the leaves of the neck are lanceo- 
late. Rosettes decorate the neck of a capital in the 
Museum of Naples!; garlands of lotus buds and flowers, 
at Naukratis (Fig. 225); the lotus and palmette alter- 
nate at Lokroi? and in the Erechtheion. At Magnesia 
on the Maeander (Fig. 226) and in the Theatre of Lao- 
dikeia the high neck forms the principal moulding of 
the capital and is decorated with palmettes having al- 
ternately inward- and outward-curving petals. In the 
theatre at Aizanoi® the necks of the capitals were deco- 
rated with acanthus scrolls. Painted zigzags decorated 
the neck of an archaic capital at Delos. In Roman 
1 Mauch, Detailbuch, Taf. 6. 


2 Petersen in Rém. Mitt., V (1890), 193. 
8 Texier and Pullan, Pl. 20. 


DECORATION 195 


_ buildings undecorated necks were not uncommon and 
became typical of the so-called Tuscan order. 

The chief moulding of the capital was, as we have noted, 
. either of rectangular 
or circular section. 
| Rectangular capitals 
were formed chiefly 
‘i under [onic influ- 
. ence. Originally, 
as in a capital rep- 
, resented on a vase 
from Hagia Triada 
(Fig. 227), now in 
the Museum at 
Candia, the  rec- 
tangular form was 
emphasized by the 
decoration. But al- 
: - most universally the 
‘4 sharp angles of the 
rectangular block 
a were rounded, the 


ee. Pe eee! OS gk eee 


a faces were decorated 

‘a with spirals, and the 

sides with the pul- 

¥ ° . 

a VARs all of which Fia. 225. — Neck of capital from Naukratis. 
> concealed the essen- 


tial rectangularity of the capital block. Capitals deco- 
; rated with spirals were used by the Egyptians, Assyr- 
ians, Hittites, Phoenicians, and Persians, and probably also 
by the Mycenaeans. This type of decoration seems to 
have been derived from a floral prototype, possibly that 


196 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


of the Egyptian lotus.!_ Many fanciful derivations have 
been suggested.? A great variety of spiral forms are 
found on Greek cap- 
itals. Capitals from 
Neandreia, Lesbos, 


Fic. 226. — Neck of capital from Magnesia. 


Delos, and Athens® exhibit the 
spirals, in Oriental fashion, spring- 
ing vertically from the shaft and Fic. 227.—Capital on a vase 
united by horizontal bands. A» “°" es *aa 

survival of this type occurs in the South entrance of 
the Palaistra at 
Olympia (Fig. 228). 
In the capitals with 


spirals spring hori- 
zontally from above 
the echinus. An 
interesting early ex- 
periment in _ this 
direction is ex- 
hibited in a capital 
from Delos (Fig. 
229). In these ex- 
amples a lotus 
flower, palmette, or acanthus leaf appears between the 
1 Goodyear, 115-137. 


2 Marini, I, 179, note 57; Hittorff et Zanth, 335, note 1; Clarke in 
A.J.A., II (1886), 8-9. 8 Perrot et Chipiez, VII, Pls. 52-58. 


Fic. 228. — Capital from the Palaistra, Olympia. 


an echinus the 


: 
x 
‘ 
. 
4 


DECORATION 197 


spirals. This flower, or leaf, pattern, which occurs in 
Egyptian examples, seemed to have been an obstacle in 
the development 
of the Ionic cap- 
ital and was con- 
sequently given 
up. The spirals 
henceforth became 
united in the 
contre. Their 
springing point in 
a few cases, as on 
the capitals from 
the Temple — of 
Apolloat Phigaleia — 
(Fig. 230), was 
raised so high as to give their channels at the start a 
downward slope. But in the normal classic type, as ex- 
emplified in the capitals 
of the Temple of Athena 
Nike and the Propylaia 
at Athens (Fig. 231), the 
united spirals are bounded 
above by horizontal, and 
below by sagging mould- 
ings resembling festoons 
(éycaptra). In the Mau- 
soleion at Halikarnassos, 
the sagging moulding has almost disappeared.! In these 
examples it will be noticed that palmettes cover the angles 
where the sagging moulding meets the spirals. These 


Fic, 229. — Capital from Delos. 


Fie. 230. — Capital from Phigaleia. 


1 Bates in Harvard Studies, X (1899), 31. 


198 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


palmettes decorate an awkward corner without violat- 
ing the very ancient tradition, which associated angle 
flowers with ‘spirals, as, for example, in the ceiling at 
Orchomenos. A horizontal instead of a sagging mould- 


NMUUIA((C 


Fic. 231.— Capital from the Propylaia, 
Athens. 


ing is seen in some cap- 
itals, as in those of the 
Philippeion at Olympia 
(Fig. 232). In most 
Hellenistic capitals, as 
at Magnesia on _ the 
Maeander (Fig. 283) 
and at  Teos, this 


moulding was omitted; even the effect of horizontality 
is not so strong in reality as it appears in line draw- 
ings, since the eggs and darts of the echinus were sepa- 


ae 
> 4 _ 
a 
5j 

' 

ry 

F 

* 
& 
7 

2 
Ea 
as 

r 


Fic. 232. ea itat hom the Philippaion® Onna 


“rated by sharp cuttings, and had no visible bond of 
union. A more elaborate type of spiral decoration was 
devised by subdivision of the volutes. Thus, in the 


DECORATION 199 


Nereid Monument at Xanthos,! the channel (canalis) of 
the capital is subdivided into double-ranged channels 
which wind spirally until they meet at the central oculus. 
In the capitals of the 
North Porch of the 
Erechtheion (Fig. 234) 
there is a subdivision 
into four channels which 
die away into three and 
then into two—the 
channellings and dividing mouldings showing a subor- 
dination which can only be appreciated by close observa- 
tion of the original or of a cast. Another type of capital 
resulted from the application of the double scroll, as in a 


Ws ZA 
SY 


WW) Zp M 
<WUUe 


Fie, 233.— Capital from Magnesia. 


Fic. 234. — Capital from the Erechtheion. 


capital from Megara Hyblaea (Fig. 235). But superposed 
spiral forms, such as those which occur upon Assyrian 
and Persian monuments,” do not seem to have been favored 
by the Greeks. 

Considerable variety in the effect of spiral capitals re- 


1 Puchstein, Jon. Cap., Fig. 19. 
2 Reber, Figs. 35, 50, 80. 


200 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


sulted from the manner of treating the channel and the 
edges of the spiral band. In some archaic examples, as 
at Ephesos and Neandreia, the channel was convex; in 
others, from Athens and Delos, 
a plane surface; ordinarily it 
was concave, as its name implies. 


the Temple of Nike at Athens, or 
relatively deep, as in the Mauso- 
leion at Halikarnassos. The effect 
also varied according to the form 


Fic. 235.— Pilaster capital 


fot Misara Heotet the old temple at Ephesos a plain 


temple, and frequently elsewhere, we find a roundel set — 
upon a fillet. In the Erechtheion these mouldings were 
subdivided by a triangular incision. Flat fillets were — 
employed in the Temple of Artemis at Magnesia and in 
many later buildings, and a 
double or duplex fillets 
in the Palaistra at 
Olympia.! 

In the enriched type 
of Ionic capitals the 
channel itself was or- 


Fic. 236. — Capital from Samothrace. 


Sometimes it was shallow, as in 


given the terminal mouldings. In 


roundel was used, but in the later . | 


namented. Thus in the Erechtheion it was decorated : a 


by subordinate mouldings. In Hellenistic capitals, such 
as those of the Ptolemaion at Samothrace (Fig. 236), 
or the Temple of the Apollo Smintheus in the Troad, it 
was decorated with an acanthus scroll. In Roman capi-— 
tals, as in S. Maria in Trastevere2 at Rome, the acanthus | 


1 Olympia, II, Taf. 74. 2 Haussoullier, 172. 


— 7 | i; 
nme rr 
ee. to. 
ohn 


DECORATION 201 


leaf sometimes ornamented the channel in its entire course, 
including the volutes. The treatment of the oculus also 
modified the charm of the capital. This was usually an 
unornamented circular disk. But in some capitals from 
the archaic temple at Ephesos! a large rosette took the 
place of spirals and disk, and in a capital found in the 
Erechtheion a rosette was carved upon an oculus of nor- 
mal size. In the capitals of the North Porch of the Erech- 
theion oculi of bronze were probably employed. It is 
possible also that half palmettes of bronze were used in 
the angles of the spirals, and that their stems were carried 
in spiral windings to the oculus. In some capitals of the 
facade of the Temple of Apollo at Miletos heads of divini- 
ties were substituted for volutes. 

It would be interesting to know how the Greeks designed 
their spirals. The method of describing a spiral, given by 
Archimedes,? is an ideal rather than practical method, while 
that of Vitruvius® produces a spiral of but two revolutions. 
A survey of a collection of Ionic capitals, such as those 
illustrated in Puchstein’s Das Lonische Capitell, will show 
very great variety in respect to the point where the terminal 
moulding reaches the oculus. In the archaic and classic 
periods these spirals were probably drawn free hand. Ban- 
ister Fletcher* has suggested that spirals similar to those 
of the Ionic capital may be drawn by unwinding a cord from 


’ the convolutions of a spiral sea shell. Penrose® has shown 


that they may be formed with mathematical accuracy by 
unwinding a string from a cylinder. In the Hellenistic 


1 Hogarth, Pl. 7. 2 Tlepi éXlkwv. 

3 Vitruvius, HI, 5. For a résumé of various methods of designing 
spirals, see Marini, I, 179, note 57. Cf. Pennethorne, 159. 

4 Building News, Aug. 22, 1902; Cook, Spirals, 187. 

5 J.RI. Br. Architects, X (1903), 21-80; A.J.A., VII (1908), 462. 


202 GREEK ARCHITECTURE ‘ 


period, the use of some mechanical method of producing 
spirals seems probable, as the endeavor to bring the ter- 


minal moulding to a vanishing point above the oculusis  __ 


quite evident. The number of windings was usually more 
than two. An exceptional example, from the North Por- 
tico of the Agora at Priene,! shows three windings on one 
and four on the other volute. 

Our consideration of the Ionic capital is not complete 
without a word concerning the decoration of its base. 
When the spirals sprang vertically from the shaft, as in 
the capitals from Neandreia, no decoration at the base was 
required. But when they sprang from a higher level, the 
base of the capital was ornamented with a horizontal band, 
which Athenian designers elaborated into a series of 
superposed mouldings of varying profile and decoration. 
One archaic capital from the Acropolis? shows a platband — 
decorated with a maeander set between two egg and dart 
mouldings; another,? a quarter round decorated with the 
scale pattern above a cyma reversa with the Ionic leaf and 
dart. The capitals of the Erechtheion show a braid set 
above an egg and dart and a bead and reel. A simpler 
and broader effect was preferred by the architects of the 
Propylaia and of the Temple of Athena Nike, who placed 
at the base of the capital an echinus moulding carved with 
the egg and dart. With singular persistence the egg and 
dart has continued to be the characteristic decoration of 
this moulding throughout its entire history. Considerable 
difference, however, may be observed between the refined 
forms of the egg and dart ornament in Athenian capitals 
of the classic period and the mechanical treatment which 
was only too common in later days. 


1 Priene, Figs. 194,195. 2 Puchstein, Fig. 4. 3 Ibid, Fig. 7. 


DECORATION 203 


The side of the Ionic capital, formed more or less like 
a bolster ( pulvinus), was variously treated. At Lokroi it 
was decorated with pen- 
dent lanceolate leaf or 
scale ornament. Other 
archaic Ionic capitals, 
such as that of the 
column of the Naxians 
at Delphi (Fig. 237), or 
those of the old temple 
at Ephesos, were deco- 
rated with vertical channellings separated by roundel 
mouldings. This kind of decoration brought the capitals 
into harmony with the decoration 
of the shaft and bases of the 
columns. The Erechtheion cap- 
itals (Fig. 288) were similarly, 
but more richly decorated, in 
| having bead and reel in place 
Fia. 238. — Pulvinus decoration of plain roundels. When the 
from the Erechtheion. , é 
pulvinus was formed like a 
compressed bolster by means.of a central belt (fovn, 
decuos), this was decorated with vertical channellings, 
or with some form of leaf 
decoration, and, on either 
side of the centre, lanceolate 
leaves were often arranged 
horizontally to emphasize the 
independence of the capital. 
At Magnesia (Fig. 239) the Fis. SEN ae ae 
form and decoration of the 
pulvinus suggests two calyx capitals set base to base. 


Fic. 237. — Pulvinus decoration from 
Delphi. 


SANANANANANANANANAAY 
Se ie Oh 


204 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Acanthus leaves were sometimes substituted for the 
lanceolate leaves. The great altar at Pergamon furnishes 
examples of studied variety in 
pulvinus decoration, a thunder- 
bolt! being sometimes substi- 
tuted for geometrical or floral 
ornament. A special type of 
decoration found at Pergamon 
BIS: cute paige eee (Fig. 240), and also at Olympia, 

consisted in carrying the belt ! 
above the pulvinus until it reached the abacus. This 
appears to represent a feeling on the part of the architect 
that the decoration of the side of the capital by means of 
exclusively horizontal lines emphasized too strongly the 
independence of the cap- 
ital. In the capitals of 
the propylon at Priene 
(Fig. 241) a branching 


eee ey ee, AO eee pe 


scroll ornamented the a 
sides of the pulvinus. | 3 
The extreme limit of Fic. 241.—Pulvinus decoration from ‘q 
floral ornament applied roe ; 
to the pulvinus may be seen in the capitals from the Ionic , 
Temple on the theatre terrace at Pergamon (Fig. 242). ; 

The next stage in decoration was the substituting of ani- " 
mal for floral types. This occurred in the corner capitals : 
of the Agora at Magnesia on the Maeander.? At Salamis ‘ 
in Cyprus (Fig. 243) the heads of winged bulls formed : 
the sides of the capitals, their curved wings taking the a 


place of volutes. | 
When the principal moulding of the capital was not 


1 Pergamon, II, Taf. 12. 2 Magnesia, Figs. 128, 130. 


DECORATION 205 


rectangular but of circular section and showed convex, 


ae | Fig. 242.— Pulvinus decoration from Ionic Temple, Pergamon. 


concave, or other profiles, the decoration was modified to 
some extent by the form of the moulding. Thus the 


n from Salamis, Cyprus. 


Fig. 243. — Pulvinus decoratio 


torus mouldings of the capitals of the Tholos of Atreus 


206 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


were decorated with rhomboids enclosing spirals —a type 
of decoration which brought the capitals into close har- 
mony with the decoration of the shafts. When this 
moulding had a curved profile varying from an hyperbola 


rc 


Fic. 244, — Capital from the Heraion, Samos. 


to a straight line, it was usually painted or carved with 
the egg and dart, as in the columns of the Heraion at 
Samos (Fig. 244). The egg and dart was so common a 
decoration of the echinus moulding in general that we 
might expect to find it also on the echinus of the Doric 
capital. It does occur, in fact, on an early stele capital 
from Athens.! Other types of ornament, having less re- 
gard to the form of the moulding, are also found on these 


1 Borrmann in Jhb., III (1888), 274. 


DECORATION 207 


stele capitals, as, for example, the scale ornament and 
palmettes enclosed-in scrolls. Whether such ornaments 
were ever applied to larger capitals such as those of 
a temple, or stoa, is uncertain. Boetticher! claims to 
have seen an ege and dart painted on the capitals of the 
Theseion, and Semper verified his observations. Other 
observers, however, have been unable to find any traces 
of painting even on the protected sides of these capi- 
tals, and the German excavators at Olympia? found no 
such decoration there. Although the Egyptian analo- 
gies are not very close, it would be interesting to believe 
that the Doric capital was of Egyptian origin. On any 
other hypothesis, in fact, it is difficult to explain the 
raised annuli that decorate the base of the capital. 
Choisy? considers them reminiscences of the original 
blocking out the capital. Were this the case, we should 
expect to find simple, broad bands in archaic capitals, and 
a series of annuli as a later development. The earliest 
archaic capitals, however, show three or four raised an- 
nuli, reminding us of those which occur at the summit of 
the shaft or the base of the capital of Egyptian columns; # 
and later capitals frequently show a smaller number of 
annuli, or none at all. By means of color, alternately red 
and blue, applied to the separating incisions, the annuli 
were made to stand out in clearer relief. They were also 
emphasized by the varied formation of the separating in- 
cisions. ‘Thus, in the earlier Temple of Aphaia at Aegina 
(Fig. 245), the incisions were semicircular in section; in 
Temple C, Selinous (Fig. 246), triangular ; in Temple D, 
Selinous (Fig. 247) and in the Parthenon (Fig. 248), 
1 Boetticher, 71. 8 Choisy, I, 291. 
2 Olympia, I, 184, 4A. J.A., VI (1890), 52. 


208 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


curved in the upper half, and straight in the lower. Cruder 

methods of indicating the annuli are 

yyy found in many capitalsfrom Olympia __ 

Yj (Fig.249). In later examples, as in the “ . 
~/ interior order | BA 

of the Tower 


Fic. 245.—A Hef. : 
ae eae eee ey Pe ee ae 
Old Temple, Aegina. : 
and in -Stue 


\\ 


Gate of the Agora at Athens (Fig. | Yj 
250), the 
jj annuli were ; 
YH sometimes . Fia. 246.—Annuli from 


Temple C, Selinous. 


TY applied _ be- 
| low the echinus. The number 


was by no means constant. They a 


Ee lage une from varied from one to five,! but four 
emple D, Selinous. . 

a may be considered the normal 
number. In the examples thus far considered the an- _ 


Fic. 248.— Annuli from the Par- Fia. 249. — Annuli from Olympia. 
thenon. 


nuli were formed like fillet mouldings. Occasionally, ee ¥ 


1 Olympia, II, Taf. 88, 5, 9. 


R 
; 


DECORATION 


209 


however, we find other forms. In one of the capitals 
from Paestum! the annuli consisted of roundel mould- 
ings; at Cadacchio (Fig. 251), of a fillet, a cyma recta, 


and a quarter round. At Paestum, in 
one of the capitals from the Temple 


of Demeter, a cyma recta decorated — 


with upright leaves took the place of 
simpler annuli; in a second, a triple 
braid ; inathird, a frieze of lotus flowers 


and rosettes ;2 and in a fourth, lotus 


flowers alternating with palmettes.? 
Such highly decorative substitutes for 
the annuli were, however, exceedingly 
rare. When the channellings of the 
shaft were carried through the neck of 


7 


Yj 


a 


Figs 250.=- Ann nii 
from Agora Gate, 
Athens. 


the capital it was a great practical convenience that they 


Fie. 251. — Annuli from Cadacchio. 


should end against a hor- 
izontal annulus rather 
than die away on the 
conical surface of the 
echinus. ‘This, perhaps, 
accounts for the extraor- 
dinary persistence of 
the annuli in the Doric 
capital. The decoration 
of capitals of concave 
profile — campaniform or 
calyx capitals —in some 


cases closely follows Egyptian prototypes (Fig. 252). Thus 
the well-known capital from the Theatre of Dionysos in 


1 Puchstein, 49, Fig. 41, 3. 
3 See Fig. 228. 
P 


2 See Fig. 224, 


. en x 
‘ rd 
‘ 1, 
210 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 
Eeye en 
Walaa | ti j j 
; 
Fia. 252. — Capital from Thebes, Fic. 253. — Capital from the Theatre of Dio- 
XVIII dyn., Egypt. nysos, Athens. 
Athens (Fig. 253), seems to be a translation of Egyptian 
into Greek floral forms. Similarly, some of the capitals 


Fic. 254. — Capital from the Stoa of Eumenes, Pergamon. a 


‘ 
i 
F 
; 
: 
i; 
4 
, 
bs 


Fia. 256. — Capital from Thebes, 
XIX dyn., Egypt. 


DECORATION 211 


from the Stoa of Eumenes at Pergamon (Fig. 254) recall the 


Egyptian palm-leaf capital 
(Fig. 255). Even for the 
more usual type with acan- 
thus decoration Egyptian 
prototypes may be cited. 
A Theban wall painting of 
the XIX dynasty (Fig. 
256) exhibits a calyx cap- 
ital with angular volutes, 
and a row of pointed leaves 
at the base —a type of cap- 
ital which, in the Ptolemaic 
period, was elaborated into 
very complicated forms. 
The earliest Greek capital 
with analogous decoration 
was found in the interior of 


Fic. 255.— Capital from El Bersheh, 
Egypt. 


the Temple of Apollo at Phigaleia (Fig. 257). It had 


small angular volutes, large 


ues nel atl oe 


Fig. 257. — Capital from Phigaleia. 


central spirals and palmette, 


212 GREEK ARCHITECTURE — 


and a double row of acanthus leaves at the base. In the 
Tholos at Epidauros (Fig. 258) the angular volutes were 
almost completely detached from the central bell of the 
capital, the central spirals made smaller, the central flower 
raised until it 
touched the 
abacus, and more 
space allotted to 
the acanthus 
decoration, which 
in this case con- 
sisted of a row 
of alternately 
high and = low 
leaves. The cap- 
itals of the Monu- — 
ment of Lysi- 
crates in Athens 
(Fig. 259) were 
still more highly 
developed. In 
this case the cen- 
tral bell was hidden by elaborate spiral, acanthus, and floral 
decoration, resembling applied metal work. In the half 
capitals in the Philippeion at Olympia (Fig. 260) the 
central spirals and flower were given up, the acanthus 
leaves were multiplied, and for the first time appear cornu- — 
copia-like, channelled caulicult from which the volutes 
spring. In the normal Corinthian capital, exemplified in 
the Olympieion at Athens (Fig. 261), the central spirals and 
flower reappear — the flower being raised to the summit of — 
abacus — and both rows of the acanthus leaves are strongly — 
curled at the top. 7 


Fic. 258. — Capital from the Tholos at Epidauros. 


DECORATION 213 


Capitals whose principal moulding shows the form of 
a cyma recta were decorated in various ways. That of 
the Votive Column of Aischines at Athens (Fig. 262) was 
decorated with the Doric leaf ornament, and with a similar 
series of pendent leaves on the moulding above it. The 


Fig. 259. — Capital from tue Monument of Lysicrates, Athens. 


leaves were colored alternately red and a dark gray. In 
the capital of another votive column at Athens (Fig. 263) 
the double curvature of the cyma recta would appear 
to have influenced the painted decoration, of which the 
upper half is upright and the lower pendent. But this 
influence was not felt in every case. Near the Temple of 
Artemis at Magnesia a capital of this form was found 


214 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


decorated with a single series of upright palmettes. The 
larger capitals of this form, like those of the Leonidaion 
at Olympia, and those of the gymnasium at Pergamon, 
appear to have been undecorated. | 
The abacus of the Greek capital was often left undeco- 
rated. ‘This severe simplicity was all but universal in 
Doric architecture 
of the archaic and 
classic periods. 
Occasionally, how- 
ever, some simple 
ornament was 
given to the face 
of the abacus, as, 
for example, in an 
archaic capital at 
Olympia (Fig. 
264), where the 
abacus shows four 
incised annuli, a 
decoration which 
brought it into 
‘ harmony with the 
decoration of the echinus and the shaft; or in the anta 
capitals of the Enneastylos at Paestum, where the abacus 
blocks were surrounded by a small fillet moulding; or 
in the capitals of votive stelae at Athens (Fig. 265), 
where painted maeanders were not unusual in Doric as 
well as Ionic capitals. In capitals of the Ionic style the 
abacus was ornamented by the modification of its profile 
through the addition of mouldings, or by carved or painted 
ornament. The variations in profile we have already con- 


Fic. 260. — Capital from the Philippeion, Olympia 


4 ‘- pieKoe ; - : 
IO ee Sele Pana On ge > 
EE a eae ee, ee 


ET See a ony ys eh 


+6 Pee or _- a * 


sg 


DECORATION 215 


Fic. 261. — Capital from the Olympieion, Athens. 


sidered in a previous chapter. In Attic-Ionic capitals 
the abacus was given the form of an echinus carved with 
the egg and dart ornament. ‘This echiniform abacus with 


Fia. 262.— Capital from the votive offering of Aischines. 


216 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the carved ege and dart appears to have capped some 
of the columns of the Old Temple of Artemis at 
Ephesos.t. Other capitals from this temple had an abacus 


Fic. 263. — Capital from the votive offering 
of Evenor. Fic. 264.— Abacus from Olympia. | 


with a cyma reversa profile decorated with the Lesbian 
leaf and dart. ‘The latter type of abacus with its decora- 
tion was used also at Priene, Halikarnassos, Magnesia on 


Fic. 265. — Abacus from Athens. 


the Maeander, and elsewhere, so frequently as to entitle it ~ 


to rank as the normal Ionic abacus. More complicated 
types of abaci, consisting of a series of mouldings, were 
sometimes, as in the Leonidaion at Olympia, left without 
further decoration; sometimes, however, as in the Temple 


1 Br. Mus. No. 2727. Photograph by A. M. — 


~ 
‘> ee aad = 
ee ee es, ee reo 


aa 
Sa 


& 


DECORATION BT. 


of Zeus at Labranda and in the peribolos of the Temple of 
Aphrodite at Aphrodisias (Fig. 266), all of the mouldings 
were decorated. ‘Lhe acanthus scroll, as we might expect, 
was finally appled to the decoration of the abacus, as in 
the Temple of 
Minerva in the 
Roman Forum, 
and in other 
Roman _ build- 
ings. 

6. DECORATION OF THE ENTABLATURE. — The entab- 
lature had its specific decoration on epistyle, frieze, and 
cornice. 

The face of the epistyle received, as a rule, little or no 
decoration. ‘This, however, was not invariably the case. 
The fragments from the fagade of the tomb of Atreus 
make it probable that the wooden epistyles of Mycenaean 
palaces! were covered with geometric ornamentation. 
Shields were hung up on the epistyles of the temples 
at Delphi, Olympia, and at Athens. Disks, which pos- 
sibly were to have been carved as rosettes, decorated the 
uppermost band of the epistyle of the Porch of the 
Maidens at Athens. In the pre-Roman temple at Suwéda 
in Syria,? the lowest band of the epistyle was decorated with 
oblique squares enclosing rosettes and surrounded by small 
disks. Floral motives, such as running palmette and vine 
patterns, may have been used at a late period in Sicily,? if 
we accept as evidence the fragments of vases with archi- 
tectural decoration. The central band of the epistyle of 
the Temple of Jupiter Stator in Rome* was decorated with 


TI 


Fic. 266. — Abacus from Aphrodisias. 


1 Perrot et Chipiez, VI, Pl. 5. 8 Kekulé, II, Taf. 61. 
2 Butler, 330; De Vogié, Pl. 4. 4 Taylor and Cresy, II, Pl. 86. 


218 ' GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


a beautiful running lotus and palmette pattern. Mytho- — 


logical subjects carved in low relief were employed to 
decorate the epistyle of the archaic temple at Assos. In 


the Hellenistic and Roman periods the fasciae, or bands, _ 


in Ionic and Corinthian epi- — 


styles were frequently capped _ 

YY aN iONS with ornamental mouldings. — 

)\S In the temples of Zeus at 
SUIUIU! Magnesia and at Aizanoi, and — 

reine’) )K 0K) in the Temple of Aphrodite at = 
Aphrodisias, each fascia was 

capped with the bead and — 


reel. In the theatre at Myra 


(Fig. 267) the central fascia Ss 


SG NA; was capped with a cyma re- 
: AY / /\ versa decorated with a modified 


form of the Lesbian leaf and 2 
dart. Onthearch of Septimius 


oe ee Severus in Rome the acanthus 
CMHC HD decorated a similar moulding. 

The crowning moulding of 

the epistyle was decorated 


Fic. 267. — Epistyle from Myra. 


crowned by a red taenia with blue regulae and guttae. 


A similar decoration appears to have prevailed generally 


with color, or carved orna- ws 
ment, or both. Thus,in tombs — 
of the Doric style in the Cyrenaica,! the epistyle was 


in Dorie architecture of the archaic and classic periods.2 _ 


On the taenia of the Parthenon epistyle (Fig. 268) was 


painted a double maeander, and on the regulae, hanging = 


1 Smith and Porcher, Pl. 87 ; Beechey, 443. ; 
2 Cf. Fenger, 13; Borrmann, 1338-1339; Wiegand, 57; Hittorff, Pl. 6. 


DECORATION | 919 


palmettes and lotus flowers. Ionic epistyles were crowned 
with curved mouldings usually decorated with carved 
ornament. Thus the echinus moulding which crowned 
the epistyle of the Temple of Athena at Priene was 
carved with the egg and dart, and the cyma reversa of 


the Erechtheion, and ef the Tholos at Epidauros, with 


Fic. 268. — Epistyle from the Parthenon. 


the Lesbian leaf and dart. Double-coursed ornament was 
used in the crowning mouldings of epistyles in Hellenistic 
buildings, such as the Temple of Artemis at Magnesia, or 
of Apollo near Miletos. In these cases there was an 
echinus moulding carved with an egg and dart and a 
cavetto decorated with the lotus and palmette. In the 
theatre at Myra the cavetto was ornamented with a vine 
pattern. In richly decorated Roman temples, such as the 
Temple of the Sun at Rome,! the acanthus scroll orna- 
mented the cavetto. <A series of superposed mouldings, 
richly decorated, were used in the Great Altar at Perga- | 

mon (Fig. 269). | 
The soffit of the epistyle was left undecorated during 

1 q@’Espouy, Pl. 68. 


220 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the archaic, and most of the classic period. In later Ionic, 


we ee 


Fic. 269. — Epistyle crown 
from the altar at Per- 
gamon. 


and in Roman buildings, it was 
usually ornamented with panel- 
lings, which were surrounded by 
decorative mouldings. Thus, in the 
Temple of Artemis at Magnesia 
(Fig. 270), a bead and reel mould- 
ing was used; at Priene (Fig. 271), 
a Lesbian leaf and dart over a bead 
and reel; at Pergamon, in the 
Tonic temple on the Theatre terrace, 
the panel was pulvinated and deco- 
rated with a scale or laurel leaf 
pattern surrounded by a bead and 
reel (Fig. 272). Still more com- 
plicated was the soffit decoration 
of the epistyle in the Temple of 
Serapis at Pozzuoli.! | 

The antithema of the epistyle 
calls for little comment. Its deco- 
ration was influenced by the ex- 
terior face of the epistyle. When 


the exterior face was highly decorated with bead and 


Fic. 270. — Epistyle softit, Magnesia. 


reel or other carved mouldings to mark its successive 
1 @’Espouy, Pl. 94. 


DECORATION LAN 


fasciae, similar mouldings are likely to be found on 
the antithema. The crowning mouldings, when differ- 
ing in profile from those on the exterior, received a 


Fic. 271. — Epistyle soffit, Priene. 


different decoration. In such cases harmony with the 


ceiling mouldings seems to have been the determining 


factor. 


The decoration of the frieze was conditioned by its 


form. The Doric frieze called 
for interrupted, the Ionic for 
continuous, or uninterrupted, 
decoration. In the Doric 
frieze, the metopes were 
frequently left undecorated, 
exhibiting a plain white sur- 
face of stucco or marble. 
Their square surfaces, how- 
ever, afforded an inviting field 


for the decorator. At Ther-— 


mon in Aetolia! have been 
found fragments of a terra- 


Seecee 


= 
SEE SWE ee 


Sor ata 


Ke mk XK od 


Se” 


MA AAR ARR AER On te et 


Pee 


aes 


ASX 


Fig. 272. — Epistyle soffit from Per- 
gamon. 


cotta frieze of the archaic period in which the metopes 
were. painted with such subjects as Perseus, the Gor- 
goneion, three divinities enthroned (Fig. 278), and 
two women facing each other. Framed as they usually 


1 Eph. Arch., 1908, 71-95; A.J.A., VIII (1904), 108. 


222 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 

were by strongly projecting triglyphs, metopes were bet- 
ter adapted for sculptural decoration. They themselves 
were sometimes provided with individual frames, consist- 


Fic. 273. — Metope decoration from Thermon. 


ing of broad bands at the summit and base, and narrow 
ones at the sides. As examples of such box-like metopes 
may be cited the well-known Perseus, Herakles, and 
Apollo metopes from Selinous, now in the Museum at Pa- 
lermo. The metopes from the temple at Assos exhibited a 
broad band at both top and bottom. In the Treasury of | 
the Athenians at Delphi there is a broad band at the top, 
and a narrow one at the bottom of the metopes (Fig. 
274). In later periods metopes had no individual frame- 
work beyond an abacus or crowning moulding. This 
abacus was sometimes enriched by mouldings in the form 
of an echinus, half round, a bead and reel,t or cyma 


1 Penrose, Pl. 17, 


DECORATION 228 


reversa and cavetto,! and occasionally adorned with under- 
cuttings and minor mouldings at its base. The face of 


Fic. 274. — Metope from the Treasury of the Athenians, Delphi. 


the metope was often carved with decoration more or less 
elaborate. A very simple pattern consisted of a narrow 
band of Doric leaves immediately below the abacus, as in 


‘3 1 Cockerell, Pl. 8, Fig. 2. 


224 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the Old Temple of Athena on the Acropolis at Athens 
(Fig. 275). Possibly this was a reminiscence of a decora- 
tion common in Egyptian cornices. Other conventional 
floral patterns were used, such as the horizontal palmettes 
on the alabaster frieze from Tiryns, or the beautiful rosettes 


on the metopes of the Tholos 
at Epidauros. Symbols such 
| as bucrania and tripods deco- 
AMMAMAMMMMMMMnm | »ated the metopes at the thea- 
tre of Delos, and_ shields 
were placed by Mummius 
upon twenty-one of the met- 
) opes of the Temple of Zeus 
at Olympia.! 
But figured sculpture with 
mythological subjects treated 
in high relief became at an 
Fic. 275.—Metope from the old early period the standard 
Temple of Athena, Athens. 

method of metopal deco- 
ration. Disconnected subjects seem to have occurred in 
some archaic buildings, but an effort was usually made 
to present some unity of design. The twelve labors of 
Herakles were admirably adapted to fill the twelve metopes 
of the prodomos and opisthodomos of a hexastyle temple, 
and are best exemplified in the Temple of Zeus at Olympia. 
To these the labors of Theseus formed a natural supple- 
ment in the metopes of the peristyle of the so-called 
Theseion at Athens. Other contests were added in the 
decoration of the thirty metopes of the Treasury of the 
Athenians at Delphi. Contests of Gods and Giants, 
Greeks and Amazons, Lapiths and Centaurs, and other 


1 Paus, V, 10, 6. 


a; 


DECORATION 295 


subjects decorated the ninety-two metopes of the Par- 
thenon. 

Triglyphs were decorated from the earliest period. 
Thus the portions of the alabaster frieze at ‘Tiryns which 
corresponded to triglyphs were decorated with rosettes. 
Similarly, at Thermon, the narrow bands which separated 
the metopes were adorned with 
rosettes. When this member re- 
ceived the form of a triglyph, 
it was usually left undecorated 
except by the formal characters of 
abacus, and grooves, and by a coat- 
ing of blue paint. ‘The various 
parts of triglyphs, however, were 
often emphasized by additional. ¥1 276.—Triglyph from 

i Temple C, Selinous. 

decoration. Thus the grooves of 

the corner triglyph of Temple C, Selinous (Fig. 276) were 
framed by narrow fillets which terminated at the summit 
inan ogee arch. In the Temple of Apollo at Metapontum 
the grooves were emphasized by an incised cutting which 
was possibly filled with coloring matter in contrast with 
that of the grooves. Theterminal half-grooves were some- 
times decorated at the summit not only with deep under- 
cutting but also by an acanthus leaf or other ornament, as 
in the Temple of Dionysos at Pergamon.?, The shanks 
(unpot) of the triglyphs were carved, in Temple C, Seli- 
nous, to a convex surface in contrast with the flat fillets 
which surrounded the grooves, whereas, at Metapontum, 
a similar emphasis was obtained by means of a projecting 
fillet moulding. The abacus was also sometimes decorated 
by scroll-work, or other motives, and in late buildings by 


1 See Fig. 127. 2 Bohn, Temp. Dion. Perg., 7. 
Q 


926 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


crowning mouldings. During the Hellenistic and Roman 
periods superficial decoration was occasionally applied to — 
triglyphs in such a way as to obscure rather than to em- 
phasize their form. Thus, in a portico at Delos,! protomoi 
of oxen over-decorated the triglyphs, and in the Propylaia 
of Appius Claudius Pulcher at Eleusis? the character of 


the triglyphs was hidden from view by various emblems — : a 


of Demeter’s worship. | 

The Ionic, or continuous frieze, presented not only a 
variety of forms but also of decoration. Often the form 
alone sufficed with its rigid planes or curved surfaces and 
crowning mouldings. But the Ionic love of decoration 
found in the continuous frieze a suitable field for running 


Fic. 277. — Frieze from Knossos. 


ornament, whether geometrical, floral, or mythological. 
Essentially geometric in type was the round-headed leaf — 
and dart ornament found in late friezes, such as that of 
the Incantada at Thessalonica,? or the Temple of Zeus at 
Aizanoi. Conventionalized floral ornament figured more 


1 Blouet, IIT, Pl. 7, 2 Durm, 118. 
* Stuart and Revett, IIT, Ch. IX, Pl. 3. 


DECORATION i 


frequently. Rosettes and lotus flowers decorated a border 
or frieze of the southern Propylaia at Knossos (Fig. 277), 
as did palmettes the alabaster frieze at Tiryns. Anthemia 


OR ERBR8 Es 


Fria. 278. — Frieze from the Stoa at Pergamon. 


of four different kinds were rhythmically arranged on the 
frieze of an Ionic niche in the Stoa of Athena Polias at 
Pergamon (Fig. 278). The continuous character of the 


gz. 


Z ALS If 
re yw 
, 
> 


Fic. 279. — Frieze from the Propylon, Pergamon. 


Tonic frieze was emphasized still better by the vine pattern, 
or branching scroll, as in the Propylaia of the Temple of 
Athena at Pergamon (Fig. 279). This type of decora- 
tion was further developed in many Roman friezes, notably 


298 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


that of the Temple of the Sun at Rome. Zodmorphic 
types, such as griffins, eagles, owls, bucrania, occur not in- 
frequently in combination with garlands. The Propylaia 
at Pergamon (Fig. 280) again furnishes an appropri- 
ate illustration. But in the archaic and classic periods 


Fic. 280. — Frieze from the Propylon, Pergamon. 


mythological subjects were preferred. Vigorous scenes 
of conflict were represented in Ionic as well as in Doric 
friezes. Thus, in the Treasury of the Knidians at Delphi 
the subjects are: (E) the conflict of Greeks and Trojans 
over the body of Euphorbos, (W) the apotheosis of Her- 
akles, (N) contests of Gods and Giants, and (S) the rape of 
the daughters of Leukippos by the Dioskouroi (Fig. 281). 
Such subjects as the contests of Gods and Giants (Delphi, 
Pergamon), Lapiths and Centaurs (The Theseion, and 
Phigaleia), Greeks and Amazons (Phigaleia, Magnesia) or 
Greeks and Persians (Athena Nike), were well adapted for 
the decoration of a continuous frieze, and lingered through 
the classic into the Hellenistic period. Local legends, 


et 


5 1h: 
rf 
a 
b 
i 


DECORATION 229 


such as the Destruction of the Tyrrhenian Robbers 
(Choragic Monument of Lysicrates) and the Story of 
Telephos (Pergamon) occur sporadically. The finest ex- 
ample of an Ionic frieze is the frieze surrounding the 
exterior of the cella of the Parthenon. Here a single 
subject — the Panathenaic Procession— was developed 
upon four sides of the building in a frieze but three feet 


Fig. 281. — Frieze from the Treasury of the Knidians, Delphi. 


four inches in height and five hundred and twenty-two 
feet eight inches long. ‘The figured procession was con- 
structed so as to ornament appropriately each wall of 
the cella. 

Both Doric and Ionic friezes were provided with crown- 
ing mouldings. In Doric buildings the triglyphs and 
metopes were usually crowned with platbands, which dif- 
fered in height and thus emphasized the regular divisions 
of the frieze. The unity of the frieze was also some- 
times marked by the introduction of an astragal or other 
moulding common to both triglyphs and metopes. The 


230 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Panathenaic frieze of the Parthenon was crowned by a 
broad platband set between an Ionic cyma reversa and 
a Doric beak moulding (Fig. 282). In buildings of the 
Ionic order the crowning moulding 
of the frieze showed carved decoration. 
This was either an echinus carved with 
the egg and dart, as in the Mausoleion 
at Halikarnassos (Fig. 283), or a cyma 
reversa with Lesbian leaf decoration, 
as in the Erechtheion (Vig. 284). The 
antithema of the frieze, in porches and 
peristyles, was usually capped by 

Fic. 282.— Cap mould- simpler mouldings. 
ings of frieze, Par- In treating of the decoration of the 
cease cornice we may consider first the bed 
moulding, then the overhanging geison. The bed mould- 
ing in the Old Temple of Athena! was a platband 


Fic. 283.—Cap mould- Fic. 284.— Cap mould- 
ing of frieze, Halikar- ing of frieze, Erech- 
nassos. theion. 


painted red; in the Parthenon,? it was decorated with 
a simple maeander. In Attic Ionic buildings, the cap 
moulding of the frieze was often identical with the bed 
moulding of the cornice. This in the Erechtheion con- 
sisted of a cyma reversa carved with the Lesbian leaf. 


1 Wiegand, Taf. 1. 2 Penrose, Pl. 1; Fenger, Taf. 2. 


DECORATION Vor 


In Asia Minor a row of dentils usually intervened 
between the frieze and cornice, and its crowning mould- 
ing became the bed moulding of the cornice. This 
was notably the case in the Temple of Athena at Priene 
(Fig. 285). The soffits. 

of the dentils were left — LAVA 
plain, but the _ inter- , 
dentils were sometimes HN MIMOIS 
broken at the top by a 
cross band, as at Priene 
(Fig, 286). This led 
to very elaborate decora- , 
tion of the inter-dentils Fra. 285. — Dentils from Priene. 

in Roman buildings.’ 

The faces of the dentils were usually undecorated, but 
in the Temple of Apollo near Miletos (Fig. 287) 
lotuses and palmettes 
of varied design deco- 
rated the dentil fronts. 
The cap mouldings of 
the dentils varied con- 
siderably. Sometimes, 
as in the Smintheion,? 
the most prominent 
moulding was a plat- 
band; at Priene and 
elsewhere, an echinus 
moulding carved with the egg and dart; in the Porch of 
the Maidens of the Erechtheion, a cyma reversa carved 


Fic. 286. — Dentils and inter-dentils, Priene. 


with Lesbian leaves. 


The decoration of the cornice varied, naturally, with its 


1 Taylor and Cresy, IT, Pls. 81, 113. 2Ton. Antiq., IV, Pl. 29. 


2 ee, = ae ory ge 


G3o GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


form. The soffit, being visible from below, afforded an 
important field for decoration. A succession of alternat- 
ing eagles and palmettes decorated it on the raking 
cornice of the Old Temple of Athena at Athens.) An un- 
broken soffit, bounded by roundel mouldings, appears 
in the  terra-cotta 
sheathing of the upper 
part of the corona of 
the Treasury of Gela 
at Olympia.2 The 
roundels were painted 
with alternate bands 


Fig. 287.— Dentils from the ‘Temple of Apollo 
near Miletos. 


of red, or black, and 


yellow, while the enclosed surface was decorated with a 
black maeander ona yellow ground. ‘The soffit of the cor- 
nice of the Treasury of the Knidians at Delphi was beauti- 
fully decorated with a carved palmette and lotus pattern ; 
that of the Temple of Dionysos at Pergamon® with sculp- 
tured lozenges, each with a central rosette. On the other 
hand the soffits of Ionic cornices were often left undeco- 


rated. Cornices with interrupted soffits received marked 


decoration. When showing a series of mutules, the latter 
were almost universally painted blue, their trunnels red, or 
white, and the intervening spaces, or viae, red.* In addi- 
tion to simple color, a double anthemion decorated the 
viae of the Temple of Asklepios at Epidauros (Fig. 
288). When coffered, as in the so-called Temple of 
Demeter at Paestum, the panels were doubtless painted so 


1 Wiegand, Taf. 1. 

2 See Fig. 289. 

8 Bohn, Temp. Dion. Perg., 6; Collignon et Pontremoli, 55. — 
4 Borrmann,, 1338-1339. oe "3 


DECORATION pay 


as to harmonize with the ceiling cofferings. When con- 
soles also were added, they, as well as the panels, were 
decorated. Almost no decoration was applied to the 
consoles and panels of the interior cornice of the Tower 
of the Winds at Athens, but in the Temple of Zeus 


Fig, 288. — Cornice soffit from Epidauros. 


at Aizanoit the scroll-shaped consoles were decorated 
with carved acanthus and the deep panels with rosettes 
in high relief—a species of cornice decoration which 
became common in Roman architecture. 

The face of the cornice in the archaic period was some- 
times highly decorated. ‘This was notably the case when 
terra-cotta sheathing was used. ‘Thus,in the Treasury of 
Gela at Olympia (Fig. 289), the decoration consisted of a 
painted braid ornament of complex type bounded by 
roundel mouldings wound with painted bands. Classic 
cornices usually discarded this luxuriance of decoration. 
The typical Doric cornice was a broad white band having 
no central ornament ; its beak moulding, however, was 
painted with Doric leaves (Fig. 290), and the blue mutules 


| 1Reinach-Lebas, Arch. As. Min., I, Pl. 32. 


234 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


on its soffit had their sides painted red. The Ionic cor- 
nice was equally simple, being adorned only with carved 
cap mouldings (Fig. 291). Only in Roman times was 


Fic. 289. — Cornice from the Treasury of Gela, Olympia. 


the face of the cornice decorated with carved maeanders, 
flutings, reeds, or other ornament. 

7. DECORATION OF CEILINGS AND Roors. — The 
decoration of Greek ceilings was concerned with the 
beams and the cofferings. Wooden ceiling beams were 


DECORATION 935 


doubtless decorated with painted ornament. - This we 
may infer from the ceilings of a later period in Byzantine 


Fic. 290. — Cornice crown from the Fic. 291. — Cornice crown from the 
Parthenon. Erechtheion. 


and mediaeval churches, and from the general demands 


W7 WY VV/7 VY VY VYY YYY VY YYY VYY 
Ni@I@ Ole @lelelenen 
ic - 7 


ae 


KO 
NN \ 


rN 
eA! 


W/W WAAAY 


"i 
\ 


ee 
ar A 


\( 


ie 
MNS 


‘\ 


W/V VY WHWY/ 


Y 
‘at 


We 
x 


VY 
NA) 


N 


Be 


See 
W/WAW WA) 
O 


el 
ANA 


Y) 
f\ 


&, 
VN \ 


cs 


YY 
‘\ 


LS 
| 
C 
c 


Fia. 292. — Ceiling cofferings from the Parthenon. 


236 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


of polychromatic architecture. The usual method of deco- 
rating ceiling beams was to sink, in their soffits, panels 
framed with ornamental mouldings, to break up the sides 
into fasciae sometimes enriched with astragals, and to 
crown them with decorative mouldings. 

The divisions between the cofferings were ornamented in 
the Theseion by a bead and reel moulding, in the Parthe- 
non (Fig. 292) and Erechtheion by a painted maeander. 
This association of the maeander with ceiling decoration 
is thought by Boetticher! to explain the definition of 
patavdpos by Hesychios as coopos Tis dpodixos. 

The recessed cofferings were ornamented in various ways. 
The Theseion affords a simple example. The soffits of 
the coffers each present a single star, painted probably in 
gold against a blue ground, and hence called ovpaves, or 
ovpavicxos. ‘The surrounding moulding was painted with 
the egg and dart. The Parthenon and the Propylaia 
show doubly recessed coffers with decorated mouldings 


surrounding the central plate. Some of the plates of 


cofferings from the Propylaia still show stars; others, 
anthemia of beautiful design. These are charmingly 
published by Penrose.2. The central plates of the Erech- 
theion cofferings were decorated by some attached orna- 
ment — probably rosettes of bronze.® Coffered ceilings 
in Asia Minor were sometimes triply or quadruply re- 
cessed, and framed by mouldings of varied form and 
carved ornament. A noteworthy example is that of the 
Temple of Athena at Priene,t where the coffers were 
framed by an echinus moulding, carved with an egg and 
dart, a cyma recta with the palmette and lotus, and a 


1 Boetticher, 90. 8 Choisy, Htudes, 181, 152. 
2 Penrose, Pl. 25. 4 Priene, Taf. 10, 


be a. eae > ©. 
pigs ee BW Fo ui 

+ «ie " 

* r) 


DECORATION Za 


cyma reversa with the leaf and dart. The Romans went 
a step further and ornamented by permanent carving 
the central plate as well as its surrounding mouldings. 
Possibly the most elaborately decorated ceilings of an- 
BS tiquity were those of the vats @Parapunyes of Ptolemy 
| Philopator, where cedar and cypress, gold, ivory, and 
: precious stones were employed in the decoration.! 

ae The triangular gable invited special treatment. Be- 
s neath the raking cornice the tympanum had its own 
crowning moulding: concave in form, and decorated with 
Doric leaf pattern, in one of the poros buildings on the 
Acropolis ;? a beak moulding, decorated with Doric leaves, 
at Aegina;® a cyma reversa, probably decorated with 
ez Lesbian leaf pattern, in the Temple of Athena Nike;* an 
echinus moulding carved with the egg and dart at Mag- 
nesia on the Maeander;® a group of mouldings in the 
Sacred Stoa at Priene.6 The face of the tympanum was 
aS ornamented sometimes by a simple motive, such as a round 
| shield, which occurs at the gable front of the Stoa at 
Priene, or by mythological sculpture in low or high relief, 
a as in the poros buildings on the Acropolis at Athens.’ In 
these archaic examples from Athens the difficulty of 
filing the narrow corners of the gable was solved by 
the introduction of composite creatures like the Hydra, 
Tritons, or Typhon, whose bodies terminated in the tail 
of a serpent, or fish. The shallow gables of Ionic temples 
were usually devoid of sculpture, but the deeper gables 
of Doric buildings allowed free standing figures. The 


1 Athenaios, Deipnos., V, 204d. 4 Ross-Schaubert-Hansen, Taf. 6. 

2 Wiegand, 148, Taf. 12. 5 Magnesia, Fig. 59. 

8 Cockerell, Pl. 6 ; Furtwangler, Taf. 33. 6 Priene, Fig. 191. 
7 Lechat, Sc. Attique, Chs, II-III. 


238 


| 
A55 $4084.24 58a yy) 


a iy 


Fic. 293. — Acroterion from the Heraion, Olympia. 


DECORATION 239 


subjects selected were usually mythological in character, 
but not necessarily related to the divinity to whom the 
temple was dedicated. The triangular space to be deco- 
tated led to pyram- : , 
idal compositions 
in which the in- 
terest culminates in 
the centre of the 
pediment. Reclin- 
ing figures occupy 
the corners of the 
pediments at 
Aegina and Olym- 
pia. The climax 
of pedimental com- 
position was 
reached in the pedi- 
ments of the Par- 
thenon, where bal- 
ance and symmetry 
were preserved 
without being 
crudely obvious. 
The acroteria 
(axpwrnpia) at the 
eens Os ibe Fig. 294. — Acroterion from the Temple of Aphaia, 
guble received — Apes. 
special decoration. 

The earliest types were perhaps circular disks repre- 
senting the ends of ridge-pole and wall-plates.t. The 
most notable early example is that found in the Heraion 


1 Benndorf in Jhb. Oesterr. Arch. Inst., II, 1-51. 


el Bes fs Ot 


240 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


at Olympia (Fig. 293), which is decorated by con- 
centric bands of geometric ornament. For this type 
other ornamental forms were substituted. The Temple 
of Aphaia at Aegina (Fig. 294) had, at its apex, an 
elaborate palmette scroll flanked by figures of maidens, 
and, at the lower extremities of the gable, figures of 
griffins. More complex acroteria of this type crowned 
the summits of the Ionic temple and the Traianeum at 
Pergamon.t The Temple of Zeus at Olympia had a 
figure of Nike at the apex, and vases at the lower angles.? 
Mounted Nereids crowned the lower ends of the gable 
of the Temple of Asklepios at Epidauros. A bronze of 
the time of Caligula® indicates that the Romans did not 
hesitate to place a quadriga over the apex of a temple 
gable. In later days Renaissance architects sometimes 
went further still and filled the space between the central 
and lateral acroteria with ornament. 

Similarly the long lines of cover tiles (kadumripes) 
were decorated at their extremities, on the ridge and at 
the eaves, by ornamental tiles usually in the form of 
anthemia (kadumripes avOeuwtol). The excavations at 
Olympia‘ brought to light many such terra-cotta ante- 
fixes of various periods. The marble antefixes of the 
Parthenon (Fig. 295) furnish fine examples of this type. 
The Etruscans and Romans often substituted heads of 
divinities and masks for the simpler anthemion. 

The sima, as the crown of the horizontal cornice or 
of the raking gable, afforded an attractive field for deco- 
ration. It was usually subdivided into a broad central 
band, with a cap, and frequently also, a base mould- 


1 Pergamon, IV, Taf. 40; V, 2, Taf. 16. 2 Paus. V, 10, 4. 
3 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Acroterium. 4 Olympia, I, Taf. 91. 


DECORATION 241 


ing. In the archaic period more complicated methods 
prevailed, the decoration being partitioned into a. series 
of superposed bands. ‘The waterspouts of horizontal cor- 


ak 


Fig. 295. — Antefix from the Parthenon. 


nices were seldom left unornamented. In the Treasury 
of Gela at Olympia the ends of the waterspouts were 
decorated as rosettes. The more common type, however, 
for all periods was the lion head. Doric simae of the 
‘archaic and classic periods were decorated with painted, 


R 


YAP GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Tonic simae with carved ornament. But the form of the 
sima had comparatively little influence in determining the 
character of the 
decoration. The 
same running 
patterns were 
applied almost 
indifferently to 
flat, concave, con- 
vex, or doubly 
curved surfaces. 


The _ flat-faced 
Fic. 296. — Si fold Temple of Athena, Athens. _. 
ima OL O empie O en 1ée sima of the Old 


Temple of Athena on the Acropolis (Fig. 296) was deco- 


Fic. 297. — Sima and cornice from Temple F, Selinous. 


rated with conventionalized lotuses and palmettes, a type of — 
ornament which, in the cornice from Temple F, Selinous’ 


iliede: ae 


ON eee Le. ee 


DECORATION AS 


(Fig. 297), developed into more stately and. graceful 
forms. Flat-faced simae occur also in the Tholos at 


Fig. 298. — Sima from Epidauros. 


Epidauros (Fig. 298), and in several of the later buildings 


ab edi ym pia, 
where they are 
decorated with 
carved acanthus 
gerolls.<.° The 
coneave' section 
of the sima from 
the Treasury of 
Gela! was deco- 


Fia. 299. — Sima from the Propylaia, Athens. 


rated with an unusual form of a conventionalized leaf 
pattern, while in that of the Bouleuterion the eld Doric 
leaf pattern still survived. The convex sima of the Pro- 


1 See Fig. 289. 


ee Say ee Fig 
iy ta oa 4 an: 


244 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


pylaia at Athens (Fig. 299) was decorated with an in- 
cised and painted egg and dart ornament, whereas in the 
Temple of Zeus at Olympia (Fig. 300), in the Parthenon, 


CNOVOVOUONONONC 


Ae > 
OYCVOO'Y 
jes G7] elgg 


Fic. 300. — Sima from Olympia. 


and elsewhere the lotus and palmette pattern prevailed. 
The transition from the echinus curve to the cyma reversa 


Fie. 301. — Sima from Olympia. 


was an easy one. At Olympia several simae retain at 
the base a platband ornamented with the maeander, while 
the ‘principal moulding was decorated with lotuses and 


DECORATION OAS 


palmettes. In the Temple of Aphaia at Aegina! the lotus 
and palmette pattern was confined to the upper part of the 
curved surface of a fully developed cyma reversa. The 
type of curve, however, which was destined to become 
normal for simae was the cyma recta. We find it deco- 


Fie. 302. —Sima from Priene. 


rated with the Doric leaf pattern in an early sima from 
one of the treasuries at Olympia (Fig. 301); with the 
palmette and lotus above the door of the North Porch of 
the Erechtheion ;2 and with the acanthus scroll and hon 
heads in the Temple of Athena at Priene (Fig. 302) and 
elsewhere. 

The waterspouts of the classic and Hellenistic periods 
were usually lion-headed (Acovtoxéparor), although dog- 
headed spouts (xvvoxéparor) occur at the Temple of 
Artemis at Epidauros. Roman architects preferred the 
cyma recta form for simae, and retained the lion heads 
and acanthus ornament. 


1 Cockerell, Pl. 13; Furtwangler, Taf. 33, 53. 2 See Fig. 201. 


CHAPTER V 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 


Tuus far we have considered the various architectural 
elements in respect to their technique, forms, proportions, 
and decoration. In this chapter we confine our attention 
to the manner in which these elements are combined, and 
to the formation of various styles. 

1. FOUNDATIONS AND PAVEMENTS. — It is not always 
remembered that more than elementary composition was 
involved in the construction of foundations and pave- 
ments. This is especially the case in adjusting the 
construction of the stylobate to its substructure. In the 
earlier buildings, as in the Heraion at Olympia and Tem- 
ples C and D at Selinous, the vertical joints of the lower 
steps of the krepidoma stand in no regular relation to 
those of the stylobate. When, later, dilithic stylobates 
were introduced, greater regularity was required in the 
jointing of the krepidoma. Hence we find in such build- 
ings as the Parthenon, or the Temple of Concordia at 
Akragas, a perfect harmony between the joints of the 
stylobate and those of the lower steps. Below the krepi- 
doma the stereobate, though sometimes partially exposed 
to view, was usually invisible. Here, especially in the 
early period, irregularity of construction was condoned. 
In the classic period, however, the love of regularity and 
harmony exhibited in the jointing system of the krepidoma 

246 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE Q4T 


was extended also to the stereobate. Thus in the Temple 
of Concordia at Akragas! we find no less than seven 
courses of masonry of the stylobate, sub-stylobate, and 
___ stereobate showing a perfectly regular system of alternat- 
ing joints. When we take into consideration that the 


Fic, 303.— Composition of stylobate and pavement blocks in the Temple of 
Concordia, Akragas. 


stylobate blocks were not all equal in length, but were 
cut to suit the spacing of the columns, and that they were 
not set in a horizontal plane, but on a convex foundation, 
__we begin to realize that the jointing system of the base of 
a classic temple required mathematical calculations of no 
os mean orcler. 

Pavements also required proper adjustment to their 
_ surroundings. In peristyles the jointing system of the 
4 pavement was gradually brought into regular relation 
with that: of the stylobate (Fig. 303) on the one side and. 


1 Koldewey und Puchstein, 172. 


248 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


that of the wall on the other. The paving blocks were 
usually laid according to some system. Thus in Temple 
C, Selinous, most of the blocks were laid in the same 
direction as the temple axis; in Temple D they were 
laid regularly at right angles to the axis of the temple. 
Usually the east- 
ern and western 
porticoes re- 
ceived special at- 


Temple of Zeus 
at Olympia (Fig. 
304) they were 
paved alike, but 


' the northern and 
southern __ porti- 
coes. In the 
Parthenon they 
were paved in 
contrast to each 

Hees other, as well as 

line ‘ to the pavements 


N 
NN 
. 

A - 


yl In the Temple 

Kia. 304.— Front and lateral pavement of the 

Temple of Zeus at Olympia. ey 
Teos! similar 


blocks were used on all four sides and laid in the direction 
of the axis of each portico. Hence it is evident that some 
skill in composition was.required in laying the paving 
blocks of peristyles. Pavements had also to be adjusted 


1 Jon. Antiq., IV, Pl. 22. 


Sy ea ee 
ant. Soe ge 
=», see * 


tention. In the — 


differently from 


of the long sides. | 


of Dionysos at — 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 249 


as to level. When under cover, they could be laid hori- 
zontally; when exposed, they were laid so as to carry off 
the rainfall by a gentle slope, as may be seen in the 
North Portico of the Agora at Priene,! or in the platform 
of the Temple of Athena in the same town. When the 
stylobate of a temple was curved, and the front and 
lateral stylobates followed the arcs of the same circle, 
the pavement would correspond in level to the surface of 
a great dome; but when the front and lateral curvatures 
were in different arcs, as, for example, in the Parthenon, 
the level of the pavement would correspond to the ex- 
trados of a huge cross-vault, with surfaces sinking at the 
angles so as to form a channel. It is safe to say that 
Greek temple pavements never exhibited this peculiarity ; 
nevertheless, the angles of a curved platform must have 
presented a problem which required some kind of practi- 
cal adjustment. 

2. WALLS. — Walls may be combined with other walls, 
or with towers, columns, piers, and 
pilasters. The simplest problem, 
that of combining one wall with 
another, was solved in primitive 
masonry by making the two walls 
meet without interpenetration. 
Such independence, however, was Fic. 305.—Corner blocks of 
ill suited to walls constructed of eee Be ee 
cut stone. When walls of regular 
cut masonry meet, they usually interpenetrate. This 
interpenetration was sometimes effected by the use of 
quoin blocks (Aor ywuaior), cut so as to turn the corner, 
a method employed by Philon in the Arsenal of the 


1 Priene, 203. 


250 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


Peiraieus (Fig. 805). Usually, however, the corner 

blocks were superposed alternately in the direction of 

the two walls, either with or without notching (Fig. 

306). In late Greek and in Roman buildings, such as 

the Ionic Temple on the theatre terrace at Pergamon, the 
juncture of two walls was some- 
times emphasized by angle pi- 
lasters.1 


In the composition of walls with © 


towers, on account of the dispar- — 


ity of form and structure, inter- 
penetration was impracticable. 


Philon of Byzantium? lays down 
Fic. 306.— Notched corner 


blocks from Pergamon. the principle in fortification that 


it is bad construction to bond to- 
gether towers and curtain walls. The relation of towers 


to the curtain walls seems to have been a matter of ex- 


periment. ‘The ancient method of projecting the towers 
at right angles to the walls was frequently practised, 
but not thoroughly approved. Philon suggested. that 
they be set obliquely to the curtain wall; Vitruvius,? 
that round or polygonal towers be substituted for those 
of square form. 


In the combination of walls with columns, piers, and 


pilasters we have already observed, in the chapter on 
technique, the tendency to replace independence of con- 
struction by interpenetration. Here it remains for us to 
describe the way in which walls were related to the 
columns in peripteral buildings. Early in the archaic 
period, as Koldewey and Puchstein* have shown, the 


1 Pergamon, IV, Taf. 27-83. 8% Vitruvius, I, 5, 4. 
2 De Rochas, 43. ' 4 Koldewey und Puchstein, 197, 203. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE yl, 


cella walls were placed without regard to the columns of 
Ee the peristyle. Later an alignment of the columns with the 
a cella walls was effected for the front colonnade, and still 
later for the lateral columns. In the Parthenon the outer 
walls of the cella are in line with the axes of the col- 
- umns adjoining the angle columns, and the faces of the 
antae are in line with . 
the axes of the third 
lateral columns, but 
the columns of the | 
pronaos and the opis- 
thodomos, though 
regularly placed with 
reference to the cella, 
have no definite re- 
____ lation to the perip- 
% teros (Fig. 307). In 
2 later buildings, such 
Ss as the Temple of - 
is Athena at  Priene, 
the cella walls and — 
the columns of the | 
peristyle were placed [ . 
with strict reference Fic. 307.—Relation of the pronuvs and perip- 
to each other. teros columns in the Parthenon. 
i 8. ANTAE AND PILASTERS.—JIn earlier chapters we 
have noted various modifications of the structure, form, 
and decoration of antae and pilasters. It remains here to 
4 add a few remarks concerning complex antae, which arose 
a from their association with colonnades. 
When an anta became part of the composition of a wall 
with a row of columns, a complex anta was produced, 


yASY4 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


which represented the termination of both wall and colon- 
nade. ‘The shaft of such an anta was, in part, a flat pi- 
laster and,in part, an engaged column. ‘This duplex form 
well expressed its double function. Then arose the prob- 
lem of forming appropriate bases and capitals for complex 
antae. At the entrance to the 
stadion at Olympia a complex 
shaft has an unbroken base and 
a single capital (Fig. 308). A 
second type may be seen in the 
peribolos of the temple at Kan- 
govar (Fig. 309), where each 
portion of the anta capital has its 
own capital, and the base mould- 
ings are broken about the rectan- 
gular and semicircular portions 
of the complex shaft in a way 
which foreshadows the bases of 
Gothic piers. 

A second problem in the com- 
position of antae consisted in the 
establishment of their planes in 
| elevation. Penrose! has ob- 
Fig. 308. — Complex pilasters served, in the case of the Par- 

from the Stadion Gate, Olym- thenon, tha’ ther amenena tala 

pia. : wae | 

a forward inclination. Hence, 
of the three planes in the elevation of the Parthenon 
antae, the front slopes outward, the .side toward the 
pronaos is vertical, and the side toward the peristyle 
has the same inward slope as the cella wall. The 
forward inclination is explained, in part, as a struc- 


1 Penrose, 106. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE Mig 3) 


tural device permitting a shorter ceiling beam, and, 
in part, on the aesthetic ground of producing, with 
the inward slope of the outer columns, a pyramidal 
effect. In any event, antae with only one side posed 
vertically show how their form was modified to suit 


their surroundings. 


4. Doors AND WInbows. — Having described the 
structure, forms, proportions, and decoration of doors 


and windows, little remains to 
be said concerning their com- 
position in Greek buildings. 
Balance in composition was con- 
sidered of great importance. The 
entrance to a Greek temple was 
in the central axis of the build- 
ing; windows, as in the Pina- 
kotheke of the Propylaia,! or in 
the east wall of the LErech- 
theion,? were equally balanced 
on either side of a central door- 
way. When a series of open- 
ings or niches occurred, the 
principle of alternation so fre- 
quently represented in Greek 
ornament led to the use of 
alternately round-headed and 
square-headed openings, as in 
the Monument of Philopappos 


Fic. 309. — Complex pilasters 
from Kangovar. 


at Athens, and frequently in Roman architecture. 


Doorways not preceded by 


porches were adapted 


1 Bohn, Taf. 7, 9. 2 Stevens, in A.J.A., X (1906), 47 ff. 


vibe GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


in size and style to the interior requirements and to 
the exterior character of the building. ‘The addition of 
porches introduced a new element into doorway compo- 
sition. It necessitated their being related to the col- 
umns in front of them. Many experiments were made 


SeRQlll PEERS SeECAMl) peEcAtll Sea allipae | 
ry Oars er Oe Sr lt ear Y SiS an SaaS OY 
a A Nt aa ANU Hii 


[TUM fT | Ce) 
oo ee a a a |) a a a |}! aa a a 
ee | 
gS ae aS A |) a a A | RS Ma 
a TEL REL 
a a a | a |) Ye ee 

TE Oe | RRR NM 

ee 
oe weed baat (A 


Hoe BR ts es BR SS ee ei OS a Rh OE a 


Fic. 310. — Blind arcade from the Stoa of Eumenes, Athens. 


with lower doorways before Vitruvius! laid down the ; 
rule that the top of the cornice of the doorway should be 3 
on a level with the top of the capitals of the pronaos 2 
columns. The cornice of the doorway in the North 
Porch of the Erechtheion is distinctly below the level of 
the capitals of the columns; the Temple of Herakles 
at Cori and later buildings often follow the rule given 
by Vitruvius. 

5. PIERS AND CoLUMNS. — Piers supporting arches 
and forming arcades are rare, but not unknown, in Greek 
architecture. In the large courtyard of the pre-Hellenie 
palace at Phaistos? large bases occur in alternation with 
small ones, suggesting an arcade with alternating piers 


1 Vitruvius, IV, 6, 1. 2 Mon. Ant., XII, Fig. 17, Tay. 2. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 2DD 


and columns. A sustaining wall composed in part of 
piers and connecting arches, on the south side of the 
Acropolis at Athens (Fig. 310), dates from the time of 
EKumenes II. In general, however, the arcade did not 
develope into an important architectural feature before 
the Romans undertook the transformation of Greek archi- 
tecture. ; 

The column and the colonnade presented many prob- 
lems in architectural composition. ‘The most elementary 
of these was to establish the proper relation of column 
to column. In the earliest colonnades ‘considerable ir- 
regularity prevailed; in the archaic period an effort 
was made to equalize the intercolumniations, but there 
were many exceptions to this rule. Some early temple 
colonnades accentuated the short and long sides by a 
difference in the intercolumniations. Sometimes the 
columns of the short sides were more closely set, as 
in Temple D, Selinous, and in the Enneastylos at Pae- 
stum; sometimes they were more widely spaced, as in 
Temple C, Selinous. In fully developed Doric temples, 
like the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, greater harmony 
prevailed. The spacing of the columns on the long and 
the short sides was practically the same. The inter- 
columniation opposite the doorway of a temple was, to 
the earlier architects, a matter of indifference; in later 
days it was wider than the rest and, according to Vitru- 
vius,! demanded in the frieze an extra triglyph. Another 
and far-reaching cause of irregularity arose, in Doric 
temples, from the desire to have the colonnade harmo- 
nize with the entablature, so that the position of the tri- 
glyphs would form a regular cadence with the axes of 


1 Vitruvius, IV, 3, 4. 


‘ 


256 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the columns and the centres of the intercolumniations. 
This could have been easily done, had the Greeks been 
content, with Vitruvius, to leave metopes or halves of 
metopes at the ends of the frieze. But they preferred to 
have the frieze end with triglyphs. To secure this they 
admitted various irregularities in the frieze. For ex- 
ample, in the Temple of Zeus at Akragas! much broader 
metopes are found near the extremities than elsewhere 
in the frieze, and in the Parthenon? the sizes of the tri- 
glyphs and the metopes were quite irregular. The spac- 
ing of the colonnades was also modified in that the ter- 
minal columns were brought closer together. Sometimes 
this contraction? was confined to the terminal intercolum- 
niations, which made a strong contrast with the rest of 
the colonnade; but in fully developed Doric temples it 
was extended, as in the Parthenon and in the Temple of 
Concordia at Akragas, to the next to the last intercolum- 
niations. ‘The many modifications required in harmoniz- 
ing the Doric colonnade and its entablature led Roman 
architects to reject this order as mendosum et disconveniens.* 
They preferred the Ionic and Corinthian, in which there 
was no such problem. 

Another problem in the composition of colonnades con- 
cerns the emphasis or lack of emphasis to be placed upon 
the corners of a peristyle. In the case of the Temple 
of Apollo at Corinth (Fig. 311) and in the Temple 
of Zeus at Olympia,® we find, not merely the corner 
column, but all the columns of the facade, of greater 
diameter than those of the long sides. Here the most 


1Durm, 125. 8 Koldewey und Puchstein, 197-200. 
2 Penrose, Pl. 7. 4 Vitruvius, IV, 3, 1. 
5 Olympia, II, 7. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 257 


important colonnade received the emphasis. In the 
Theseion and the Parthenon greater harmony prevailed 
in the sizes of front and lateral columns. It was not 
the entire fagade, but merely the angle columns, that 
were given superior thick- 
ness. In the Theseion a 
very delicate emphasis is 
laid on the corner column. 
It is of the same diam- 
eter, but has less diminu- 
tion than the other columns 
of the peristyle.t Vitru- 
vius? maintains that cor- 
ner columns should be one- 
fiftieth larger in diameter 
than the rest. His ar- 
gument, that corner col- 
umns being seen against 
the sky appear to be slen- 
derer than those _ seen 
against the temple walls, 
is not supported by mod- Fic. 311. — Relation of frontal to lateral 
ern writers. The theory columns in the Temple of Apollo, 
of Philander? that thicker Corinth. 

corner columns produced a sense of greater stability 
in peristyles seems nearer the truth. In the stoa and 
the agora the corners were emphasized by larger col- 
umns,? by quadrangular piers,° or by piers with en- 
gaged columns (Fig. 312), which served as frames and 


1 Reinhardt, 10. 8 Marini, I, 147, note 22. 
2 Vitruvius, III, 3, 11. 4 Pergamon, I, Taf. 33. 
5 Priene, Taf. 13. 

s 


958 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


connecting links of aesthetic rather than structural con- 
sequence. . 

A further problem arose in the case of double colon- 
nades. In archaic temples when a double row of col- 
umns preceded the temple cella, the inner columns were 
sometimes heavier than those of the outer peristyle, as 
in Temple C at Selinous.! In the classic period, however, 


S 


La 


<3 Fic. 312. — Corner pier from Magnesia. 
the inner row was composed of perceptibly slenderer 
columns, as in the Parthenon.? This practice became 
the rule in later days. Vitruvius? tells us exactly how 
much slenderer the inner row should be, and that the 
apparent slenderness should be increased by additional 
channellings. 

The composition of the colonnade and walls with re- 
spect to elevation furnished a new problem in the case 
of the peripteral temple. Were the outer face of the 
cella wall vertical and the column shafts cylindrical, the 


1 Koldewey und Puchstein, 99. 2 Penrose, Pl. 3. 
3 Vitruvius, IV, 4, 2. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 259 


colonnade would harmonize best with the cella walls if 
it too were vertically set. But when the outer face of 
the wall sloped inward, and the columns diminished in 
diameter toward the top, a colonnade posed on a vertical 
axis would form a porch wider at the top than at the 
base, and thus apparently lack stability. According to 
Garbett, the colonnade in front of the British Museum, 
being thus posed, appears in danger of falling outward.! 
To correct this fault was a practical necessity. It is 
also held by some writers that when a line of tapering 
columns are set on a vertical axis, they present a fan- 
like appearance. Choisy? assures us that this is the 
case with the Pantheon and the Palais du Corps Légis- 
latif in Paris. It may also be remarked that, in the case 
of convex stylobates like those of the Parthenon, if an 
attempt were made to pose each column perpendicularly 
to the stylobate, a fanlike divergence would actually 
occur. Hence columns were harmonized with the walls 
by being given a similar inward inclination, and the fan- 
like divergence was corrected chiefly by means of the 
counter inclination of the angle columns. In peristyles 
an angle column belonged to two colonnades, each of 
which demanded of it a different counter inclination. 
This double demand was met by inclining the angle col- 
umn in the direction of the diagonal of the temple base. 
Sometimes only the corner columns supplied the counter 
inclination ; in other cases the columns adjoining the 
angle columns also shared in it. An inclination of the 
colonnade toward the walls is found in the best Athenian 
buildings, as the Parthenon, the Propylaia, the Theseion, 
and even in the Erechtheion ;? but in other fine Doric 


1 Garbett, 155. 2 Choisy, I, 406. 3 Penrose, 36-38. 


260 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


temples of the classic period, like the Temple of Apollo at 
Phigaleia! and the Temple of Concordia at Akragas,? and 
in some of the best Ionic temples, as the Temple of 
Athena at Priene,® it does not occur. Vitruvius* re- 
quired a stronger inclination than is found in Greek 
temples, insisting that the axis of the colonnade be in- 
clined toward the walls far enough to overcome the 
diminution of the column and render the inner profile 
perfectly vertical. 

The art of composition included also the decoration 
of columns. In the great majority of cases the same 
_type of base, shaft, and capital was repeated throughout a 
colonnade. But decorative composition of a more com- 
plex type was found in the archaic as well as in the 
Hellenistic Temple of Artemis at Ephesos,° where variety 
was exhibited not only in the sculptured shafts, but also 
in the bases and capitals. In the North Porch of the 
Erechtheion a very delicate symmetry was produced by 
the use of concave bands in the braids which decorated 
the bases of the corner columns, while convex bands were 
used for the others. In the Artemision at Magnesia ® hori- 
zontal and vertical leaf decoration was applied alternately 
on the bases of the columns of the peristyle, while the 
bases of the columns of the pronaos and opisthodomos 
were decorated with braid ornament. The facade of the 
decastyle Temple of Apollo near Miletos’ presented a 
most elaborate scheme of decorative composition. Here 
the bases and capitals of the corner columns corresponded 


1 Cockerell, 64. 4 Vitruvius, III, 5, 4. 
2 Koldewey und Puchstein, 173. —, 5 Hogarth, 264-271. 
3 Priene, 89. 6 Magnesia, 53. 

7 Haussoullier, 184-177. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 261 


with those of the columns of the lateral colonnades. The 
remaining bases, and probably the capitals also, were ar- 
ranged in pairs, each pair differing from other pairs and 


in some cases individ- 
ual bases differing from 
their mates, the pairs 
being arranged so as to 
produce a rhythmical 
alternation of forms as 
well as a symmetrical 
balance of decorative 
motives. 

It may be further re- 
marked that when the 
Ionic order was used, 
the corner columns of 
a peristyle presented a 
problem in composition 


Fig. 314. — Inner view of Ionic corner 


capital. 


decorative palmettes (Fig. 3 


K 


Y 


Fia. 313. — Plan of Ionic corner capital. 


in the spirals of their capitals. 


At the exterior angle (Fig. 
313) the spirals were usu- 
ally drawn out in a direc- 
tion corresponding to the 
diagonal of the abacus, 
and the angle was some- 
times marked with an orna- 
mental palmette. The. 
interior angles of such 
corner capitals were espe- 
cially awkward, but at 
Priene they were relieved by 
14). Dorie and Corinthian 


capitals did not involve this difficulty. 


LO? GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


6. ENTABLATURES. — In treating of composition in the 
entablature we shall consider first the epistyle, and then 
the frieze and cornice. 

The epistyle blocks were fashioned so as to compose 
in various ways with each other. In rectilinear or circular 

colonnades the problem was purely tech- 
nical, and solved by fine jointing and 
proper clamps. In turning the corners 
of a rectangular colonnade, the difficulty 
consisted in selecting a proper joint. 
Fie. 315. Plan ot ben the epistyle-consisted of a series 
corner epistyle Of single blocks, a half mitre, half butt 
=e oa ae joint was used, as in the Propylaia at 
eS “ "Pergamon (Fig. 815). When double 
blocks were employed, as in Temple E, 
Selinous, only the inner blocks were mitred (Fig. 316). 
In the Temple of Zeus at Olympia,! where a triple series 
of blocks met at the corners, the outer blocks formed a 
butt joint and the inner blocks were 
mitred. 

The epistyle should also compose 
well with the frieze, and with the 
colonnade. Its composition with the 
frieze was partially formal. Both po 314 — pian of eor- 
followed, of necessity, the same plan, ner epistyle blocks 
and shared the same curvilinear modi- ‘om Temple E, 

Selinous. 
fications. But frequently epistyle and ; 
frieze differed in form, and were united chiefly ‘through 
their decoration. . In the Doric order the regulae occur- | 
ring beneath the cap moulding of the epistyle serve 
no other function than to bind together decoratively 


1 Olympia, I, Taf, 138, 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 263 


the epistyle and frieze. In the Ionic order epistyle 
and frieze differ markedly in form, but their cap mould- 


ings usually present some decorative motive in com- 
ig mon. The composition of 
the epistyle with the colon- 


nade required more care- 
ful adjustment than is 
_ usually supposed. The 
es early builders at Selinous 
(Fig. 317), Metapontum, and 
Paestum timidly posed their 
-__ epistyles behind or flush 
with the upper face of the 


Fic. 317.— Relation of epistyle to 
shaft in Temple C, Selinous. 


colonnade. At Aegina (Fig. 
318) and at Athens, in the 
classic period, the epistyle 
was advanced well beyond 
the face of the columns.? 
_ Fig. 318, —- Relation of epistyle to In cases where the colonnade 
aie the Temple of Aphala, inclined inward so as to har- 
i, monize with the walls the 
epistyle was given an analogous inclination, only rather 


1 Krell, 84, 101. 


264 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


greater in amount (Fig. 319). The frieze followed the 


epistyle. Even the tympanon of the triangular gable 


shared this She Oe but to a less degree. This was 


Fig. 319. —Inward incli- 
nation of the entablature, 
Parthenon. 


the case in the Parthenon, the 


Theseion, and the Propylaia. 

It would be interesting to know 
just what inclination, if any, was 
given to the entablature of the 
Erechtheion, where the inward 
inclination of the columns was 
exceedingly shght. In the Porch 
of the Maidens the vertical faces 
of the epistyle were perfectly ver- 
tical,! but here the Maidens them- 
selves were vertically posed. 
However, in the interior of the 
Propylaia the Ionic columns were 
vertically | 
posed, and 
yet the epi- 
style was 


given a forward or outward incli- 
nation (Fig. 320). This tilting for- 
ward of the entablature in Ionic 
colonnades was a rule with Vi- 
truvius,? who argues that the upper 
portions of epistyles, friezes, cor- 
nices, gables, and acroteria, being 
remoter from the eye of the spec- 
tator than their lower portions, 
would appear to slope inward and 


Fic. 320. — Outward lean 
of the epistyle, Propylaia, 
Athens. 


1 Twanoff, I, Taf. 18. 2 Vitruvius, III, 5, 13. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 265 


hence must be tilted outward in order to produce the 
effect of perpendicularity. 

The details of 
the epistyle do not 
always follow its 
general disposition. 
‘aus. the ~Par- 
thenon, though the 
epistyle is tilted in- — Fic. 321. — Corner regulae of the Parthenon. 
ward, the face of 
its taenia is vertical and that of the regulae is given 
an inward slope.! In the North Portico of the Agora 
at Priene? the taenia, as well as the regulae and their 
trunnels, was tilted inward. The significance of these 
variations is not always obvious. In the composition of 

. the regulae at the 
corners of buildings 
the practice in the 

~ archaic and _ classic 
periods was to juxta- 
pose the two regulae, 
carving six trunnels 


Fic. 322. — Corner regulae of the North Stoa, on each (Fig. 321). 


Priene. 


Later the two reg- 
ulae were united at the corners, and a corner trunnel 
made its appearance (Fig. 322). The number of trun- 
nels sometimes differed from the canonical number, 
six. Thus the regulae of the poros epistyles from 
Athens? show four and five trunnels; those of the 
Temple of Dionysos at Pergamon,* seven; those of 


1 Penrose, Pl. 22. 3 Wiegand, 150. 
2 Priene, 194. 4 Bohn, Temp. Dion. Perg., 7. 


266 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the Monument of Thrasyllos at Athens,! a continuous 
row. : 

The frieze, as an intermediate member, presented several 
problems. Its relation to the epistyle, to the contiguous 
frieze, to the cornice, to the colonnade, and to the cella 

walls had to be properly adjusted. 

The frieze was posed in the Doric order usually sn 
its triglyphs flush with the epistyle, the metopes being set 
back. In the Temple of the Nemesis at Rhamnous? the 
face of the triglyphs appears to have been set slightly be- 
hind the face of the epistyle, but this method of hghten- 
ing the superstructure of the entablature was seldom 
attempted. In the Parthenon the antithema of the frieze 
was slightly set back, and a space left between the external 
frieze and its antithema. In the Ionic style the frieze 
was frequently set flush with the lowest fascia of the 
epistyle, as in the Temple of Athena Nike.* In the 
Erechtheion* the face of the frieze was set farther 
back, in order to avoid too marked a salience of, the 
applied relief. As we have already noted, the frieze 
shared also the inclination and the curvature of the 
epistyle. ‘ 

Friezes, whenever carried around a portico or building, 
had to be adjusted to contiguous friezes. In archaic 
buildings the fagade sometimes had triglyphs broader 


than those of the sides.° In the classic period the 


front and lateral triglyphs were of equal breadth. When 
a frieze was continued around a corner the problem of 
uniting the two friezes was a simple one. In the 


1 Stuart and Revett, II, Ch. 4, Pl. 4. 3 d’Espouy, nig BEL 
2 Mauch, Taf. 10. ¢ Tbid., PLT 
5 Wiegand, 8. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 267 


Doric order this was accomplished by a corner triglyph 
(tpiyAugos youaia), which presented the appearance 
of two triglyphs at right angles to each other, with 
a half groove in common (Fig. 323). An unusual type 
of corner triglyph, with two half grooves at the angle, 
is found in the Palace of Hyrkanos in Syria. In 
Ionic friezes the problem concerned chiefly the decora- 
tive reliefs, and was 
solved by means of 
figures near the angles 
which served like punc- 
tuation marks for the 
successive phases. of 
the figured theme. 
When the triglyphal 
frieze was applied only 
to the front of a build- 
ing, as in the Treasury 
of the Megarians at 
Olympia, the adjust- 
ment at the corner was 
not so happily solved 
(Fig. 324). | 

The harmony of the 
frieze with the cor- 
nice required not only 
a proper regard for the 
length of the blocks, so as to avoid coincidence in 
jointing, but also some similarity in form or decoration. 


Fig. 323.— Corner triglyph from the Treas- 
ury of Selinous, Olympia. 


Thus, in the Doric order, the triglyphs and metopes de- 


termined the position of the mutules of the cornice, a_ 
mutule occurring in regular cadence over each triglyph 


‘ 


268 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


and over each metope. A panelled cornice, such as 
that of the Temple of Demeter at Paestum, seems also 
to have been regulated with reference to the subdivisions 
of the triglyphal frieze. The forms of mouldings and 
their decoration were also utilized to establish a closer 
harmony between frieze and cornice. ‘Thus the trunnelled 
regulae were reéchoed in the 
trunnelled mutules, and the 
eap mouldings of the frieze 
were repeated as a whole or 
in part in the crowning mould- 
ings of the cornice. : 

The relation of the frieze to 
the colonnade made further 
demands upon the architect’s 
skill in composition. The 
difficulties were numerous in 
the use of the Doric order. 
He had first to determine 
the number of triglyphs to be 
distributed in the frieze. 
When the columns were closely 
set, as in the Temple of Apollo 
Fic. 324.— Corner triglyph from at Syracuse, it is possible 

the Treasury of Megara, Olym- that one 4triglypn sweeeciared 

ne over each column and a met-— 
ope or an opening over each intercolumniation. ‘This 
system may be termed monotriglyphal (yovotpiydudos).4 
The usual type of Doric frieze was ditriglyphal (é:tpéyrv- 
gos), and exhibited a triglyph over each column and one 


1 Koldewey und Puchstein, 64; Boetticher, 206-210; confused in 
Vitruvius, IV, 3, 7. 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 269 


over each intercolumniation. Polytriglyphal systems were 
also in use. ‘l'wo triglyphs are found above the central 
intercolumniations of the Propylaia at Athens ;! three 
over each intercolumniation of the lower order, and four 
over those of the upper order, of the Stoa at Pergamon ;? 
five between the columns of the Tomb of Theron at 
Akragas; six are found between the columns of the 
Doric Niche in the Stoa at Pergamon,® and seven be- 
tween the pilasters of a Doric tomb fagade at Antiphel- 
los. But the chief difficulty in adjusting the triglyphal 
frieze to the colonnade arose from the twofold endeavor 
to adhere to the system of posing triglyphs above the 
axes of columns, and at the same time to terminate 
the frieze with triglyphs rather than with a half met- 
ope. The result was that, even in so carefully con- 
structed a building as ‘the Parthenon, triglyphs, metopes, 
and epistyle blocks were not uniform in size, the tri- 
glyphs were rarely posed above the axes of the columns 
or of the intercolumniations, and the plumb line from the 
apex of the gable did not divide equally the central inter- 
columniation.°® 

The Romans set a higher value on rigid uniformity, 
posed the terminal triglyphs above the axes of the columns, 
and did not hesitate to leave a portion of a metope at the 
angle.® | 

Triglyphal and figured friezes were sometimes applied 
for other purposes than for colonnades. At Phaistos’ we 
find the base of a bench decorated with a triglyphal frieze; 


1 Bohn, Taf. 4-5. 4 Texier, III, Pl. 197. 
2 Pergamon, II, Taf. 21. 5 Cockerell, 69 ; Penrose, 17. 
© [iid ~ 11, ‘Tat. 26, 28. 6 Durm, Bauk. Etr. Roém., 378. 


7 Mon. Ant., XII, 46, 47, Tav. 7. 


270 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


at Corinth,! the outer wall of a fountain; at Olympia,? a 
circular altar. Friezes were also applied above doorways, 
or as string courses upon walls, or as crowning ornament. 
In the Temple of Zeus at Olympia,® a sculptured frieze 
decorated the pronaos and also the opisthodomos; in the 
Theseion,‘ the frieze of the pronaos was carried across the 
pteromata to the colonnade of the peristyle ; at Sounion,° 
it was carried not only across the pteromata, but com- 
pletely around the interior of the front porch ; at Phigaleia, 
a frieze encircled the interior of the naos ; in the Parthenon, 
it decorated the exterior of the pronaos, the opisthodomos, 
and the cella walls. | Be 
The composition of the dentil band required a harmoni- 
ous relation to frieze and cornice. ‘This was effected chiefly 
__ through similarity of 

decorative mouldings. 
The connection of this 
band with the colon- 
nade was somewhat 
remote. The axis of 
the column, if con- 
tinued upward, would 


| 


Fic. 325.—Corner dentils from Priene viewed genti] or an_ inter- 


from below. qenue 

When one dentil band met another, as in rectangular 
buildings, the composition of the corner dentils sometimes 
received special attention. To one who gazed upward from | 
below the square space left at the angle looked awkward. 


1 A.J.A., VI (1902), 306-320. * Ibid., I, 10, Taf. 10. 


2 Olympia, II, Taf. 95. 4 Stuart and Revett, III, Ch. I, Pl. 4. 
5 Ath. Mitt., IX (1884), 325, Taf. 16. 


strike indifferently a_ y 7 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE iL 


This was remedied, in the Temple of Asklepios at Priene, 
by the introduction of a decorative motive, such as a 
_palmette (Fig. 325). To one who viewed the face of 
the building, the side of the lateral dentil made a striking 
contrast with the 
fronts of “the vA ANIA A INN 
other dentils PTO OR HOW OM OWMO ROMO RB ORMOMUO HO 
(Fig. 326). This 
was corrected in 
later buildings, 
such as the Tem- 
ple of Zeus at 
Labranda, by the introduction of a pendent ornament 
resembling an egg or a pine cone. In the Ionic Temple 
on the theatre plateau at Pergamon twin dentils were 
used at the corners— but this appears to have been an 
exceptional solu- 
tion of the prob- 
lem (Fig. 327). 
Cornice com- 
position consisted 
in establishing 


Fic. 326.— Corner dentils from Priene ; front view. 


Fig. 327. —Twin dentils from the lonic Temple at harmonious and 

eo teaton. suitable relations 
with the frieze, the dentils, and adjoining cornice. In 
the Dorie style the mutular system of the cornice was 
determined by the system of the frieze. Thus in the 
monotriglyphal system of the Temple of Apollo at 
Syracuse the cornice was doubtless unimutular, exhib- 
iting one mutule above each triglyph and none above 
the metopes. In Temple C, Selinous, the cornice was 
sesquimutular, as it exhibits one mutule above each 


pat ihe GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


triglyph, and a half mutule above each metope. The 
usual Doric cornice was bimutular, and contained a mutule 
above each triglyph and one above each metope. The 
mutules were harmonized with the epistyle by the exhibi- 


tion of trunnels similar to those of the regulae. The 


number of trunnels upon a mutule depended somewhat 
upon their width and the overhang of the cornice. A 
normal mutule contained eighteen trunnels, arranged in 
three rows, with six in each row. The half mutules of 
Temple C, at Selinous, contained but nine trunnels, three 
in a row. In the Old Temple of Athena at Athens! the 
full mutules contained twelve trunnels, arranged in two 
rows of six each; the intervening mutules were narrower 
and contained only eight. The correlation of cornice and 
frieze is well illustrated at the Treasury of the Megarians 
at Olympia. On the facade, where there was a triglyphal 
frieze, the cornice was provided with mutules; on the 
sides, where there was no frieze, the cornice had no mu- 


tules. Here and elsewhere the raking cornices of the 


gables, being only remotely related to the frieze, had no 
mutules. The face of the cornice in many cases was posed 
in a vertical plane, but in buildings where the inward in- 
clination of the entablature was pronounced the cornice 
inclined outward like the abacus of the capital.2 The 
Ionic cornice was brought into harmony with the frieze 
or with the dentil band chiefly through a general similar- 
ity in the treatment of the decorative mouldings. The 
repetition of an echinus, cyma reversa, “or cavetto 
moulding unified the composition, especially when the 
method of decoration was similar. ‘The Romans did not 
hesitate to repeat even the dentils in the raking cornice. 


1 Wiegand, 16, Taf. 1. 2 Penrose, 37, 108, 


ag 
” 
r. 
5 

: 
ae 
¢ 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 273 


The composition of the gable with the horizontal cor- 
nice required, at the outset, some experimentation before 
an adequate solution was reached. In the megaron of 
Demeter at Gag- 
gera the two 
cornices met 
without modi- 
fication and left Beh 
an awkward an- 5 
gular profile 
(Fig. 328). In 


Temple C, Se- Fic. 328.—Corner of the gable of the megarou uf 
linous, a verti- Demeter, near Selinous. 


cal profile seems to have been secured at the angle by a 
bend in the raking cornice (Fig. 329). The normal 
solution was to cut the raking cornice so as to mitre it 
to the horizontal 
cornice at the 
angle (Fig. 330). 
Z The tympanon, 
PET LE =. or: pable:- wall, 


‘ELROD : ae Sas eee ne 
Dodoooooe> vertical _ plane, 

except in build- 
ings like the Par- 
thenon! which 
exhibited an inward inclination in the colonnade and en- 
tablature. In such cases it shared this inward inclination. 
When arranged for the exhibition of gable sculptures, the 
tympanon wall, in archaic buildings, was set back, as in 
Temple C, Selinous.2, In the Temple of Zeus at Olympia 

1 Penrose, 37, 2 Hittorff et Zanth, Pl. 24. 


- 


Fig. 329.— Corner of gable of Temple C, Selinous. 


aN 


he 


974 GREEK> ARCHITECTURE 


the wall, and consequently the sculptured groups, were - 


thrown forward to the extreme limit (Fig. 831). Ac. | 


cording to Vitruvius, the tympanon should be in line with — 
the face of the epistyle and the necks of the columns. - . 
7. CEmINGS AND Roor.—Except in the case of — 


peristyles, ceilings presented little difficulty. When a. ee 2 


ee eerrere 


Fic. 330.— Corner of the gable of the Propylaia, Athens. 


coffered ceiling was applied to the peristyle of a circular 
building, the cofferings became trapezoidal in shape, as 


in the Tholos of Epidauros,! or lozenge-shaped, as in the = 5 


Philippeion at Olympia.? In the case of rectangular 
buildings the chief difficulty consisted in adjusting the 


ceiling beams to the colonnade. When the columns were ~ 


closely set, as in the Temple of Apollo at Syracuse, it is 


possible that the ceiling beams corresponded in position 


with the triglyphs or columns, one beam for each column 


and none for the intercolumniations. A two-beamsystem, 
with one ceiling beam for each column and one for each 


intercolumniation, is found in the North Porch of the 
Erechtheion., This .is the system which we find most 
frequently in developed Doric peristyles. It is illustrated 
in the lateral porticoes of the Theseion (Fig. 332), where, 


1 Lechat et Defrasse, 118. 2 Olympia, II, Taf. 82. 


ee ( 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE Bt 


however, the beams do not correspond with the central 
axes of the columns nor with the centres of the inter- 
columniations. In the front and 
rear the ceiling beams were set at 
equal distances apart, but show no 
regard for the intercolumniations 
of the peristyle or of the pronaos. 
In the Parthenon this lack of 
cadence is even more apparent, as 
there are two porches, the ceiling 
beams of which are not regularly 
related to the friezes and not reg- 
ularly related to each other (Fig. 
333). ‘To adjust the ceiling beams 
to the unequally spaced colonnade 
of a Doric facade was difficult, and 
constituted the vittwm lacunario- 
yum in the eyes of a Roman archi- 
tect.1 Even the Greeks felt this 
and invented a beamless ceiling. 
When the trabeated type of ceil- 
ing was used in peripteral build- 
ings, its application was not always 
: the same. In some early temples, 
such as Temple C at Selinous, it was 
probably applied only infront. In ; 
; the Temple of Apollo at Phigaleia 2 Fre.331. —Overhang of gable. 
é it was applied to both front and rear ais raters 
; of the peristyle. In the Parthe- 
non it was applied also*to the pronaos and opisthodomos. 


a 


1 Vitruvius, IV, 3, 5. 2 Cockerell, Pl. 9. 


276 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


In the Theseion the trabeated ceiling was applied to the 
entire peristyle, and also to the pronaos and opisthodomos ; 
but, inasmuch as the front and rear of the peristyle were 
considerably deeper than the pteromata and had heavier 
ceiling beams, their ceilings were cut off from those of 
the wings by very heavy beams. A perfectly harmonious 


Fic. 332. — Plan of ceiling beams of the Theseion. 


system, giving the same value to all sides of the peristyle, 
was devised by Pythios for the Temple of Athena at Priene 
(Fig. 3384). An unusual form of ceiling, with beams 
cutting diagonally across the corners, is found in the 
Sepulchral Monument at Mylasa.! 

The disposition of simae required a consideration of 
their application in relation to the roof and to the colon- 
nade. Being designed to regulate the flow of water from 
the roof, the simae were applied, on gable fronts, to the 
raking cornice alone, although in some archaic buildings, 


1fon. Antig., II, Pls. 24, 25, 30. 


ey, alieab. ; 
BN ny ~ 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE at 


like the Treasury of Gela at Olympia,! the sima was ap- 
pled also to the horizontal cornice. This horizontal sima 
on gable fronts defeated the purpose for which the form 
was designed, inasmuch as it retained, rather than dis- 
persed, the rainfall. It was accordingly omitted in the 
classic period. Simae were sometimes posed vertically, 


beh; + 


eee || 


Fig. 333. — Plan of ceiling beams of peristyle and.front porch of the 
Parthenon. 


as in the Treasury of Gela, but usually were given an 
outward inclination? which, in peripteral buildings, was 
more marked on the long sides than in front. 

In the Parthenon the sima was continued for a short 
distance only on the long sides of the building, and was 
then replaced by a system of antefixes; in the Temple of 
Zeus at: Olympia,® and elsewhere, it extended along the 


1 Olympia, I, Taf. 41. 2 Penrose, 37. 
3 Olympia, I, Taf. 11. 


278 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


entire length of the pteromata. The antefixes, and the — 
lion heads of simae, were set at regular intervals, and 

were employed, sometimes separately, sometimes in com- 
bination with each other. Thus, in the Heraion at — 
Olympia,! disk-like antefixes decorated the end of each 


Fic. 334. — Plan of ceiling beams of the Temple of Athena, Priene. 


line of cover tiles; in the Parthenon,? an anthemion type 
of antefix was set at every alternate line of cover tiles; _ 
in the Temple of Zeus at Olympia,’ the lion heads of the _ 
sima occur at similar intervals; in the Leonidaion,* both 
antefixes and lion heads are found, the former at the ends 
of the cover tiles, the latter between them. Antefixes 
and the lion heads were regularly related to the frieze, 
and therefore to the colonnade. The normal type of leon- 
tokephalic sima appears to be one in which a lion head 
was centrally superposed above each mutule, which 


1 Olympia, II, Taf. 98. 3 Olympia, I, Taf. 11. 
* Penross,Pis ily, * Tbid., I, Taf. 99. 


pel il Pe Fe eT) ee ee 
, a = a a rs + oe ¥ Py 
are 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 279 


amounts to saying that one lion head occurs above each 
column and three above each intercolumniation. Other 
systems seem also to have been employed, in some of 
which the number and pose of the antefixes and lion 
heads had no definite relation to the colonnade.! 

In the composition of acroteria, their size, height, and 
character had to be considered. In some countries 
the acroteria were inordinately large ;? elsewhere they 
were insignificantly small. Their height was accordingly 
made the occasion for many experiments. In the Temple 
of Aphaia at Aegina? the heights of the acroteria are 
very far from the standards set later by Vitruvius, 
who directed that the acroteria at the lower ends of 
the gable should reach in height the apex of the 
tympanum, and that the acroterion at the apex should 
be one-eighth higher than those at the ends. There 
must also be some conformity between the character 
of the acroterion at the apex and those at the sides. 
In the Heraion at Olympia terra-cotta disks sufficed for 
all the acroteria. When figured sculpture was introduced 
at the apex of a gable, as in the Temple of Asklepios at 
Epidauros, similar figured acroteria were placed at the 
lower ends. 

Two further steps may be noted in the composition of 
acroteria. In some cases the lateral acroteria were 
adapted to the peripteral plan by being returned around 
the corner. This was more common in small structures, 
like sarcophagi, than in important buildings. Another 
development was the multiplication of ornaments at other 
points on the raking cornice. This appears to have been 


1 Olympia, I, Taf. 66. 3 Furtwiangler, Taf. 33, 38. 
2 Renan, Pls, 50, 61. 4 Vitruvius, IIT, 5, 12. 


280 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the case in the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus at 
Rome,! and to have been revived in the decoration 
of Lombard and Venetian portals of the Renaissance 
period. y 

8. StyLe. — After having considered in detail the 
technique, forms, proportions, and decoration of the vari- 
ous architectural members, and having pointed out how 
they were modified when associated with each other, little 
remains to be said about style, except to point out the 
fact that certain architectural features were naturally 
grouped together so as to form distinct styles. ‘These 
styles may be distinguished as the Doric, Ionic, and 
Corinthian, to which may be added the Mixed, and 
the Miscellaneous. Of these the Doric and Ionic stand 
in strong contrast, distinguished from each other by 
a number of particulars. The Corinthian style agrees 
in so many details with the Ionic that we might well 
refuse to give it the standing of a separate class, 


were it not that the ancient writers? all agree in so 


recognizing it. : 
In the Doric style the column had no base; its shaft 
had a strong diminution and entasis, and was adorned 
with channellings of elliptical section separated by sharp 
arrises; its capital was of circular plan and hyperbolic 
profile and was capped by a rectangular abacus; its pro- 
portions were heavy. Upon this type of column rested a 
heavy entablature, consisting of a plain epistyle crowned 
by a rectangular moulding, a frieze divided into triglyphs 


1 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Capitolium, Figs. 1146-1151. 

2 Vitruvius, III and IV ; Pliny, N.., XXXVI, 56,1; Paus., VIII, 45, 
5. The Tuscan style, included by Vitruvius and Pliny, was a form of 
Roman rather than of Greek architecture. 


ry 
1 
st " 
4 
aq 
ey 
3 
* 
re 
"3 
, 
MN 
4 
by: 
a 
+ 
van 
7 i 
‘ 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 281 


and metopes, and an overhanging cornice, with mutules 
or cofferings, capped by a beak moulding. The Doric 
style was abundantly represented in the Peloponnesos, in 
Sicily, and in southern Italy. The Parthenon (Fig. 335) 
may be taken as the most refined, though not the strong- 


Fig. 335. — Dorie order of the Parthenon. 


est, or most characteristic, example of its class. The 
individual forms which composed the Doric order differed 
according to varying conditions of time or place, but the 
general combination has come down with slight change 
to the architecture of modern times. 

The Ionic style was associated in its early history with 
Asia Minor, where various modifications of type were 
produced. In general, the Ionic column was provided 


282 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


with a base ; its shaft had but shght diminution and 


entasis, and was adorned with channellings of semicir- 
cular section separated by flat arrises; its capital was 


Fic. 336. — Ionic order of the Mau- 
soleion at Halikarnassos. 


composed of an_ echinus 
moulding, painted or carved 
with the egg and dart, 
above which were spirals 
and lateral bolsters crowned 
with a low abacus. Its pro- 
portions wereslender. Above 
this was laid a light entab- 
lature consisting of an 
epistyle subdivided into suc- 
cessive fasciae; a frieze un- 
broken, but often adorned 
with sculpture in low relief, 
and a cornice of graceful 
profile normally supported 


on dentils and crowned with 


delicate mouldings. The 
Ionic style flourished in the 
great cities on the west coast 
of Asia Minor, reached a most 
refined stage at Athens, and 
passed almost without change 
into Roman and later Euro- 
pean architecture. The 


Mausoleion at Halikarnassos (Fig. 336) furnishes an ex- 


cellent example. 


The Corinthian style in most details was identical with 


the Ionic, and differed from it only in the type of the 


capital, in a preference for curved friezes, and for cornices 


7 


COMPOSITION AND STYLE 283 


supported by consoles. The Corinthian capital was essen- 


tially a calyx capital decorated with lanceolate, or acan- 


thus leaves.t- The frieze might have a plane surface, but, 
in the later period in which this style flourished, curved 
friezes were frequently associated with Corinthian col- 
umns.* The Corinthian cornice was often supported on 
brackets, or consoles,’ and thus distinguished from the cor- 
nices of the other orders. It may also be noted that the 
acanthus decoration was not confined to the capitals of 
columns, but was used to adorn the frieze, the cornice, and 
various mouldings. The Corinthian capital occurs for 
the first time in the interior of the Temple of Apollo at 
Phigaleia; it was first associated with a curved frieze in 
the interior order of the Tholos at Epidauros, and with a 
bracketed cornice in the interior of the Tower of the 
Winds at Athens. As an exterior order it first appears 
in the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates, and in the Olym- 
pieion at Athens, whence it spread to Asia Minor, and to 
Rome. 

Mixed styles are found in various periods, and in widely 
scattered parts of the Greek world. Two or more styles 
were represented in the same building in the Propylaia at 
Athens, the Temple of Apollo at Phigaleia, the Temple of 
Athena Alea at Tegea, the Tholos at Epidauros, and in 
many other buildings. But a closer mingling, such as the 
columns of one style bearing the entablature of a different 
style, occurred more frequently than we are accustomed 
to suppose. Mixed styles of architecture are pictured on 
Athenian vases of the sixth and fifth centuries. These 
probably reflect architectural practice, and in fact are 


1 See Figs. 252-262. 8 See Fig. 140. 
2 See Figs. 134-136. 4R. Vallois, in Rev. Arch., XI (1908), 883. 


284 GREEK ARCHITECTURE ~ 


found in the Peiraieus,! as well as in Epidauros, in Crete 
in the Stoa of Eumenes at Pergamon,? and in the so-calle 
Tomb of Theron at Akragas. 
Miscellaneous styles are represented in buildings where 8 
Caryatids,° Telamones, Atlantes, and Persians® are substi- iy 
tuted for columns. ‘These supports carry entablatures 
borrowed from the other styles. ae: 
1 Doerpfeld, in Ath. Mitt., [IX (1884), 285, Taf. 4. 
2 Tbid., 286. 4 See Fig. 33. 
#2 oe II, Taf. 33-34. 5 See a 221. 


Pls, 45-49. 


fs i Ce 


moe,” "> 
oh 
a 


CHAPTER VI 
MONUMENTS 


Ir remains for us to consider the various types of 
Greek architectural monuments. We shall briefly review 
the way in which the Greeks designed their towns, and 
protected them with walls and towers; erected temples to 
the gods; civic buildings for purposes of government ; 
market places for commerce; gymnasia, stadia, baths, and 
other structures for the physical, and libraries, museums, 
theatres for the intellectual welfare of the people; 
palaces and houses for their shelter on land; ships to 
traverse the sea, and finally memorial and sepulchral 
buildings for the dead. 

1. Towns AND THEIR DEFENCES. — In the earliest 
periods villages (x@mar) were preferably built in the 
vicinity of a hill, which, fortified as a residence for 
the chief and a refuge for the people in case of war, 
was known as the acropolis (axpo7ous). Troy, Tiryns, 
and Mycenae suffice to illustrate this type of settle- 
ment. With the increase of population commercial 
interests became more important, and seaboard cities, 
like Ephesos, Miletos, Athens, and Corinth, became 
typical centres. In many such cases the old town on 
the hill survived and was connected by walls with the 
seaport, as at Athens, Megara, Corinth. With Hippoda- 

285 


286 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


f 


mos of Miletos, in the fifth century, began the architec- 
tural planning of cities. Open squares, broad avenues 
(wXaTeiar) crossing at right angles to each other, public 
buildings distributed with a view to artistic effect as well 
as practical convenience distinguished this class of cities.} 
The Peiraieus, Alexandria, and Antioch may be cited as 
typical examples. The conception of a city as a work of 
art reached the limit of extravagance in the proposition 
of Deinokrates to convert Mount Athos into the statue 
of a man holding a spacious city in his left hand, and in 
his right a cup, into which flowed all the streams of the 
mountain.” 

The extreme regularity of the late Greek cities Ted 
naturally to the square or circle as the form to be fol- 
lowed by the enclosing walls. The square was, in fact, 
the type of Babylonian and Assyrian cities, and later 
that of the Roman stationary camp. But the walls of 
Greek cities more frequently enclosed an irregular space, 
and even Vitruvius® argues in favor of winding walls in 
order that the enemy may be seen from many points of 
view. 

The hilly character of many Greek cities led to the 
construction of level spaces and terraces, which required — 
retaining walls, such as that of the Altis at Olympia or — 
of the Stoa of Eumenes at Athens. Streets were often 


narrow and rough, sometimes paved. As early as the 


time of the Second City at Troy (Fig. 337) they were 
covered with irregular stone pavements (otp@pata). In 
the time of Peisistratos the streets of Athens were pro- | 


1 Hirschfeld, 7 upolagies Erdmann, Hippodamos von Milet ; Merckel, 
379-465. 
2 Vitruvius, II, praef. +S bids Is0ez. 


ho a cn Deg oll 


a et a ee Le 


‘4 

: 

‘S 
. 
) 
- 
5. 

i 

y: 
= 
7 

a’ 
Vane 
: “ 


MONUMENTS 287 


vided with gutters,! examples of which may also be seen 
at Priene and at Cyrene. At a later period the streets 
of Antioch were paved with carefully shaped blocks of 
marble and of granite. Sidewalks in the early Greek 


Fig. 337. — Paved road at Troy. 


cities were rare, though one has been found at Corinth. 
Later, as at Ephesos, Antioch, and Palmyra (Fig. 338), 
the principal streets were lined with single or double 
colonnades of great magnificence. The establishment of 
sacred ways (tepai odo0/) leading to temples, even more 
than the necessities of traffic, led to the improvement of 
roads outside of city walls.2, To prevent the shaking of 


1 Doerpfeld, Ath. Mitt., XXI (1896), 459. 
2K. Curtius, Zur Geschichte des Wegebaues bei den Griechen, in Abh. 
Berl. Akad., 1854. 


GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


288 


‘exXul[Rg 7B SOPpVUUO[OD YIIM 499T1IG — ‘gee ‘OI 


MONUMENTS 289 


the sacred treasures deep ruts were cut, even through 
rock, forming a fixed track for the wheels of the chariots. 
Grooves also-were sometimes cut to prevent the feet of 
the beasts from slipping.! Through marshy regions 
causeways were erected, and bridges were built over the 
streams. At irregular intervals, shrines, tombs, and 
benches were stationed. Greek bridges were narrow, 
steep crossings, supported upon piers connected by arches. 
A few examples only remain.? 

The defence of many Greek towns was aided by the 
steep, rocky declivities common in mountainous lands. 
But walls and towers were used for protection from the 
earliest times, and were not confined to cities in the 
plains. We may distinguish three types of fortification, 
according to the value set upon walls and towers. ‘The 
earliest fortifications, such as those at Troy, Tiryns, and 
Mycenae, show that their builders relied most upon the 
walls, although bastions, angular turns, and towers 
all occur at irregular intervals. These walls were built 
of huge blocks of stone, and in some cases, as at Tiryns, 
were so broad as to permit of galleries and rooms within 
the walls. Such fortifications, being open to continuous 
lines of attack, called for continuous lines of defence, and 
were better adapted to small hill towns than to large cities 
in the plain. The second type may be illustrated by the 
fortifications of Assos, Athens, Messene (Fig. 339), and 
Syracuse. In these cases, towers, representing centres of 
defence concentrated at more or less regular intervals, are 
of more importance than the walls. Projecting from the 
line of the walls, these towers were especially designed 
for flanking the enemy. ‘The third type, explained by 


1 Frazer, Paus., II, 42. 2 Guhl und Koner, 186. 
U 


290 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


ee eo 


Phiion of Byzantium,! adds moats, earthworks, mines, and 


advance walls, devices designed to meet more complicated | f q 
systems of warfare. a 

The city wall (tetyos, wep(Boros) consisted usually of 3 
towers (7vpyot) and curtain walls (wecomvpy:a), and was a 


ee 


5 


ios 


ar 


™ Be Lemos 


eerie ge 


a> 


< 


a Seth Pee 0 
Ee os ees J BS 
—" ye oe, 


¥, 
Ty. 
Pr Pee et 


b - re 
Tey th 


Fic. 339. — Tower at Messene. 


provided with one or more principal entrances (7v)av), and — 5 
subsidiary, or postern, gates (avAides).. Various types a 
of walled towns may be distinguished by the number of 
the enclosing walls. Thus, Sparta gloried in having no 
walls at all; Messene was proud of its single line of . 


1 Translated by de Rochas, Fev. de Philol., 1879. 


MONUMENTS 3 291 


defence; the Isthmus of Corinth was protected by a 
double wall!; Orchomenos in Arcadia seems to have had 
three lines of walls?; Mideia had four lines of defence 3; 
six walls had to be passed before one reached the citadel 
of Epeion in Elis. The number of important gates was 
another consideration in the distinction of cities. Thus 
Thebes was characterized by its seven and Athens, in early 
days, by its nine gates. 

Towers varied in form. Square towers, the earliest 
type, are represented in all periods. Polygonal towers 
are found at Antioch, Samos, and elsewhere. Round 
towers were preferred by Philon and by Vitruvius 
because of their superior strength in direct resistance, 
and because of the ease with which they diverted missiles. 
They were, however, seldom used in the finest Greek 
fortifications, such as those of Messene and Assos. The 
interior chambers, the form of which did not always 
correspond with that of the exterior, were provided with 
narrow loopholes (Oupides to&kat) which were singly or 
doubly splayed, and with larger openings (d/od0c) on the 
side toward the town. ‘The flat roof was surrounded with 
battlements (é7ay£es) which made an ornamental crown, 
and also afforded opportunities for offensive and defensive 
fighting. The most highly developed of Greek fortress- 
towers was the Euryalos at Syracuse.® Isolated towers 
(ppovpia), like those on the islands of Keos, Andros, and 
Tenos,® served as watch-towers as well as forts. They 
sometimes formed a series of signal stations, as at Phiga- | 
leia, Argos, and elsewhere,’ from which messages could be 


1 Frazer, Paus., III, 5. 2 Tbid., IV, 225. 8 Ibid., III, 231. 
4 Tbid., III, 475. 6 Guhl und Koner, 175. 
5 Lupus, 275-284. 7 Droysen, 258, note 1. 


292 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


quickly signalled over a considerable extent of country. 
Wooden towers made of separable parts which could 
easily be put together (7rvpyor dopnrot), and towers on 
wheels (avpyou vretpoyot) with various devices such as 
the drawbridge (é7tBa0pa, capBv«n) and grappling-hooks 
(xopaxes), were utilized in making an attack upon walled 
towns. ‘These were developed by Demetrios Poliorketes 
into immense structures, such as the ‘Taker of Cities’! 
(€Xéronus), with which he attacked the Cretan Salamis 
and the city of Rhodes. 

Between the towers of a fortified town were the curtain 
walls (uecorrupyia, wetarrupyca ), which were sometimes like 
the towers in having loopholes and battlements, and were 
broad enough to provide on top a peridromos or passage- 
way (7repiopomos, mepiodos). Vitruvius? advised that the 
towers be left open toward the interior, and that across 
the opening be constructed wooden bridges which might 
be removed in case of necessity. The peridromos was 


usually uncovered ; but the walls of Athens* were covered | 


with a roof. Where there was no peridromos on top of 
the walls, Philon* advised, on the interior and near the 
top, a wooden gallery supported by corbels—a disposi- 
tion found at Herakleia in Latmos.® Between the walls 
and the houses of the town Philon® would leave a space 
(Tapaoraots ) ninety feet broad for the transport of engines 
of war and of troops, and, in case of necessity, advised the 
erection of inner works of defence. This had no religious 
significance as had the Etruscan and Roman pomoertum. 
The great gateways (wvA@ves) with their heavy gates 


1 Smith, s.v. Helepolis ; Droysen, 215. 4 De re fortificat., § 8. 
2 Vitruvius, I, 5, 4. 5 Choisy, Mtudes, 52, note 10. 
3 Choisy, Htudes, 51. 6 De re fortificat., § 2. 


MONUMENTS 293 


(zrvdat) differed in many ways from one another. Usually 
there was but a single passageway. The Northwest Gate 


uy 
DITCH 
om 


7 
Ka) 


BSG £] 


Fic. 340.— Gate D at Mantineia. 


at Athens had a double opening (é:7vdov) ; the gate at 
Klazomenai had a triple 
opening (7pi7vXov), as 
had also the Hercula- 
neum Gate at Pompeii. 
From the earliest period 
the approaches were 
sometimes arranged, as 
at ‘Tiryns, so that the 
enemy should expose his 
right or unshielded side. 
This was not the invari- 
able rule in Greek prac- 
tice, although accepted as 
a primary maxim by Vi- 
truvius. It was far more 
common to flank the en- E: 
trance with two towers Fic. 341.—The Arcadian Gate, Messene. 
and to protect the narrow 

. passage by a series of gates, as at Mantineia (Fig. 
340). The Arcadian Gate at Messene (Fig. 341) 
offers the best example of the protection afforded by 


294 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


annexing an inner court of defence to the city gate. 
The earliest gates were severe in style, but at a later 
period some gates, such as the Dipylon at Athens, the 
principal gateway at Patras, and the Arcadian Gate at 
Messene, were decorated with reliefs and figured sculp- 
ture.! The portcullis? (catappaxtns), which we are apt 
to associate chiefly with mediaeval fortresses, is men- 
tioned by Aineias Taktikos in the fourth century B.c. ~ 
The Herculaneum Gate at Pompeii testifies to its use in 
Italy. gu) 
The moat (radpos), the mound (y@ua), and the pali- 
sades (yapa&) characterized late Greek fortifications. At 
Aegina the city wall was protected by a moat one hun- 
dred feet wide and from ten to fifteen feet deep, cut in: 
the solid rock. Philon* pre- 
scribed that all fortifications 
should have at least three moats. 
Greek methods of attack— 
whether scaling by ladders, or 
effecting breaches by means of 
the ram or by mines —were met 
by corresponding methods of de- 
fence, the description of which 

Fic. 342. — Propylaia at would carry us beyond our pre- 

Tiryns. ; eas 
scribed limits. | 

The gateways (aporvAaa, mpcOupa) of palaces, as at 
Tiryns, Phaistos, and Palatitza, or of sacred enclosures, 
as at Delos, Athens, Eleusis, and Olympia, or of market- 
places, as at Athens, are found within the city gates, and 


1 Curtius, Abh. Berl. Akad., 1854, II, 276; Krause, 147. 
2 Smith, s.v. Cataracta. 
8 Frazer, Paus., II, 263. 4 De re fortificat., § 10. 


oon Pr a? ee ee 


MONUMENTS 295 


take their character not from the defensive walls but 
from the buildings to which they lead. The plan of 
the Propylaia at Tiryns (Fig. 842), with its two porches 
set back to back, remained unchanged, except for the 
greater complexity, in the magnificent Propylaia designed 
by Mnesikles for the Acropolis at Athens (Fig. 843). 


The Propylaia at Tiryns had a single doorway; that at 


Fig. 343. — The Propylaia at Athens. 


Phaistos 1 had two openings ; that of the Temple of Athena 
at Priene, three; that of the Acropolis at Athens, five. 

2. WATER Suppity.— Next to the erection of works 
of defence, suitable provision had to be made in the build- 
ing of towns for the water supply. Women, by carrying 
water from a neighboring stream or spring, could meet the 
wants of a small settlement in time of peace, but large 
towns required securer means of supply. The hill towns in 
Greece and Italy, from the earliest times to the present day, 
have made use of open channels. But these could be so 
easily tampered with, or destroyed, that subterranean chan- 


1 B.8.A., XI (1904-1905), 188. 


296 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


nels of various kinds, such as terra-cotta or lead pipes 
(cipuyyes, addov), or rock-cut or constructed aqueducts 
(vdpaywyeta, vrdvomolt, opvywata), were substituted for 
them. ‘The water supply of the Peiraieus was in part 
concealed beneath the bed of the Ilissos, and in part pro- 
tected by the long walls from Athens.) 

The Greeks did not always recognize the value of uni- 
formity in aperture, or in strength, in their pipes, but 
they did understand that water would reach the level 
of its source, and carried their pipes through val- 
leys and over hills in accordance with this principle. 
At Patara in Lycia? an aqueduct, apparently of Greek 
workmanship, traverses a valley on an elevated structure; 
but, in general, Greek aqueducts were subterranean. 
Where practicable these subterranean aqueducts were 
aerated by vertical shafts (¢peatiac), which extended to 
the surface of the ground. ‘The most remarkable work 
of this character is the sixth-century aqueduct constructed 
by Eupalinos in the island of Samos,® where the water is 
carried from springs through a mountain by means of 
a tunnel more than a thousand metres long. Before 
being distributed, the water was usually gathered into 
large cisterns or reservoirs (€vdoyeta, deEapeval, trodoyal, 
AdkKxor). These were sometimes rock cut, sometimes con- 
structed. A fine example of a circular cistern of the 
Hellenistic period may be seen at Peligriniatza.t It is 
built of fine jointed masonry, held together by a 
very hard cement. At Thouria in Messenia there was 


1 Ziller, Ath. Mitt., 11 (1877), 107-131. 

2 Texier, III, 224 and PI. 179. 

8 Fabricius, in Ath. Mitt., IX (1884), 165-192, 
4Heuzey, Mont Olympe, 329, Pl. 8. 


ee. ee 


MONUMENTS 297 


a triply subdivided cistern. Italy, Africa, and Turkey 
still preserve remains of elaborate cisterns, sometimes 
several stories high, consisting of a number of chambers, 
through which the water passed, leaving the dregs behind. 
A climax was reached in the Bin-Bir-Direk,! or cistern of 
a thousand and one columns, at Constantinople, which 
is attributed to the architect Philoxenos of the time of 
Constantine the Great. Springs, wells, and fountains 
(xpjvat) lent themselves more readily to architectural 
decoration. In some early examples, as at Kos,? the well- 
house was a mere subterranean enclosure, or receptacle, 
with an air shaft, an apartment for the guardian, and an 
exit. From the archaic and the classic period, however, 
most towns were provided with fountains of running 
water. ‘These street fountains might be simple niches, 
as at Priene,? or more elaborate columnar structures, 
like the fountain at Ephesos (Vig. 544), and that built by 
Theagenes at Megara,* and the fountain of Peirene® at 
Corinth, or exedrae, like that built by Herodes Atticus 
at Olympia.® 

3. Rextictous MONUMENTS: ALTARS AND TEMPLES.— 
Greek worship frequently demanded little of the architect. 
Hilltops and other high places, trees of venerable age or 
mighty spread, with branches swayed by invisible causes, 
caves with mystic vapors and resounding echoes, springs 
with ever bubbling and refreshing water, were in them- 
selves sufficient to encourage worship. ‘The sacrifices 
which accompanied such worship required some form of 


1Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Cisterna. 3 Priene, 78. 

2 Guhl und Koner, 177. 4 Paus., I, 40, 1. 
5 Richardson, in A.J.A., IV (1900), 204-259 ; VI (1902), 521-326. 
6 Olympia, II, 134. 


298 GREEK. ARCHITECTURE 


altar. This altar! (PBwpes, éoydpa, upd, éotia) might 
be a mere mound of earth or. accumulation of ashes, or 


PE ee ee te) ee eae me hy fen 


Fia. 344. — Fountain at Ephesos. 


built of wood, brick, stone, or marble. Constructed 
altars were either circular or rectangular in form, and 


1 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Ara. 


¢ 


MONUMENTS 


Fig. 345. — Altar from Pergamon, restored. 


300 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


decorated with emblems of offerings. They were either 
independent, or connected with temples or houses. In 
the latter case, the altar of burnt offering was usually 
placed in front of the house or temple (Bwpos mpcdopos, 
Be@pos mpovaos), and the altar for incense and bloodless 
offerings stood within the building, and was sometimes 
replaced by a table. In the larger altars we may distin- 


guish the base (xpn7rés), the steps («A{waxes), the platform | 


(peOvors), and the altar proper (@upéerAn). Some of these 
altars, like those at Pergamon (Fig. 345), Parion, and 
Syracuse, were large monuments, decorated by colonnades 


and sculptured friezes. Sometimes several divinities — 


were worshipped at a single altar. Thus at Oropos! an 
altar, divided into five parts, was shared by various divini- 
ties, heroes, and others. 

The introduction of images of the gods led to their 


being housed in shrines and temples. In the Myce-, 


naean period the megaron of the palace may well have 


served asa temple. Its plan distinctly foreshadows that 


of the temple. The Greek temple (vaes, vews) was, in 
fact, a house (oixos), though usually distinguished from 
other houses by being set upon a high base, and sur- 
rounded by a columnar porch (qepiotudos). ‘The various 
types of temples arise, therefore, from variations in the 


disposition of the house, its base, its porch, and its 


roof, 

Most Greek temples were essentially rectangular in 
plan, but some were circular, and others, very rarely, 
cruciform. The rectangular type was single, double, 
triple, or even more complex. ‘The single type consisted 
of one room for the statue of the god, like the Temple of 


1 Paus., I, 34, 3. 


—— ss se le 


MONUMENTS 301 


Demeter at Gaggera, near Selinous, or the cave-temple of 
Apollo at Delos. This type evolved by gradual stages, 
and first by the addition of a front porch (mpevaos, mpodo- 
Hos), as in the Temple of Themis at Rhamnous (Fig. 346). 

In the pronaos were sheltered the lustral vases, from 
which the priest sprinkled his head, face, and hands be- 
fore approaching the statue 
of the god. Here were some- 
times statues, for example, 
the Graces in the pronaos of 
the Heraion at Argos,! or 
thrones, like those found in 
the Temple of Themis at 
Rhamnous,? or paintings, like 
those by Polygnotos and 
Onasias in the Temple of 
Athena Areia at Plataia.? 

The single temple _ re- 
mained unchanged, except for 
the addition of subsidiary 
features as, for example, a = 
second pronaos, a porch in yy, 346.—Plan of the Temple of 
the rear, or a porch or porches Themis, Rhamnous. 
extended about the building. The rear porch (é7ruc68op0s) 
was not usually associated with the cult, but frequently 
became a Tamletov, or storehouse for temple treasures. It 
is a feature which occurs in some of the oldest buildings 
at Troy,* in the Heraion at Olympia, and in most Greek 
peripteral temples. It is lacking, however, in many small 
religious or communal buildings, like the so-called Treasu- 


1 Paus., II, 17, 3. * Pans. EX, 45.2. 
2 Frazer, Paus., Il, 453. 4 Doerpfeld, Taf. 3. 


302 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


ries of Olympia! and Delphi, and in some large temples 


in Asia Minor, like the Temple of Apollo at Miletos. The 
effect of the opisthodomos was to give the Greek temple 
a bifacial character. Although this did not disturb the 


axis of the building, nevertheless, a temple which looked — 


in two directions inevitably lost something of the signifi- 
cance of its orientation, that is, its relation to the sun or 
to the stars. ‘The Greeks preferred symmetry to orienta- 
tion. 

The innermost sanctuary, the vaes proper, or the inap- 
proachable (aéutov), was specifically the seat (éos), or 
closed abode (on«és), or apartment (@ddapos) of the di- 
vinity. It was frequently raised a few steps higher than 
the pronaos.?, On the other hand in the Temple of Apollo 
near Miletos the level of the naos was some five metres be- 
low that of the peristasis or temple platform. But a de- 
pressed naos, like this, was exceedingly rare. In the naos 
was the cult statue, set on a pedestal and sometimes screened 
by a lattice (xuy«rs), or fencing (épvua), and a veil (zrapa- 
mwéracpa). In an open or hypaethral temple, like the 
Temple of Apollo near Miletos, the statue was protected 
by a tabernacle (valoxos, otxidvov, Terpaxiowov). Before 
it was the sacred couch, or table for offerings. On every 
side were votive offerings of various kinds. 

Further subdivision of the single temple was also 
effected by additional rooms, or by colonnades. In the 
Temple of Apollo near Miletos, between the naos and 
pronaos, was a room called the chresmographion (ypyo- 
pwoypadioy), a waiting-room for the receipt of the oracular 
deliverances. Above it was another room, apparently the 
prytaneion. In Temples C, D,and F at Selinous, behind 


1 Dyer, J.H.S., XXV (1905), 294-319. 2 A.J..A., VI (1890), 51. 


- : >: 1 t. >, } 
KM Se ieee a me Eng = i ary ae 


PUM ge, SO oer 


* 


> MONUMENTS 303 


the naos was a closed room, possibly a treasure chamber 
(@ncavpos), accessible from the interior only (Fig. 347). 
Colonnades also subdivided the interiors of some small and 


a \ 


of Temple C, Selinous. 


Fic. 347. — Plan of cells 


most of the larger temples. They were probably intro- 
duced to simplify the construction of the roof and to as- 
sist in its support. In some cases, as in the Temples of 


Fic. 348. — Plan of the Temple of Apollo, Neandreia. 


Apollo at Neandreia (Fig. 348) and at Thermon,! and 
in the Enneastylos at Paestum, a single colonnade di- 
vided the temple cella into two naves. These temples 
were, however, not well: planned for dedications to a 


1 Hph. Arch., 1900, 175. 


mee 


304 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


single divinity, nor could the entrance remain single 
and imposing. Hence the introduction of two col- 
onnades subdividing the cella into a central nave and 
lateral aisles (oToat) —a disposition which permitted still 
further expanse of roof. In most cases the aisles were 
restricted to the long sides of the naos, as in the Temple 
of Aphaia at Aegina; in the Parthenon (lig. 349) they 


Fic. 349. — Plan of the Parthenon. 


turn corners at the rear so as to form an ambulatory on 
three sides of the naos. In lofty buildings architects 
were led naturally to the use of superposed colonnades, 
with or without galleries. In the Temple of Zeus at 
Olympia! there were galleries (otoal imrep@ot) by means 
of which one might approach the image of Zeus. The so- 
called Temple of Poseidon at Paestum, and that of Aphaia 
at Aegina, appear also’to have had galleries,2 which, how- 
ever, were probably inaccessible to visitors. ‘They added 
to the stability of the colonnade and may have been used 
for storage. In very large temples, such as Temple G 


1 Paus., V, 10, 10. 2 Choisy, I, 487-489. 


ii. ak mae a 


MONUMENTS 305 


at Selinous,! there may have been a triple series of colon- 
nades with superposed galleries. 

The double temple (vads du7rA0ds) was dedicated to two 
divinities, and arranged in various ways. At Sikyon 
Pausanias? tells us there was a double temple, of which 
the outer chamber contained an image of Hypnos, and the 
inner, an image of Apollo-Karneios; on the road from 
Argos to Mantineia? there was a double temple dedicated 
to Aphrodite and to Ares, with one entrance on the east 
and another on the west; and another at Mantineia,* 
divided by a partition wall in the central axis, which 
separated the image of Asklepios from that of Leto and 
her children. ‘The Acropolis of Athens furnished famous 
examples of the double temple from Homeric times,® 
when Athena established Erechtheus in her own rich 
temple. It was represented in the archaic period by the 
Old Temple® of Athena (Fig. 350), and later by the 
Erechtheion. The present perplexing plan of the Erech- 
theion? may have been designed to follow more closely 
that of the Old Temple of Athena. The plan of the 
Parthenon itself is that of a double temple, and may have 
been designed for the old and new images of Athena, or 
possibly for a double cult.’ Different potencies of the same 
divinity, such as Aphrodite-Promachos and Aphrodite- 
Morpho, were sometimes separately worshipped in the 


1 Hittorff et Zanth, Pls. 73, 74. Against galleries, Koldewey und 
Puchstein, 201. 

2 Paus., IT, 10, 2. # Tbid., VIII, 9, 1. 

8 Toid., II, 25, 1. 5 Tliad, I, 549 ff. 

6 Frazer, Paus., II, 553-582; Fowler, A.J.A., VIII (1893), 1-17; 
Cooley, A.J.A., III (1899), 345-408. 

7 Doerpfeld, in Ath. Mitt., XXIX (1904), 101. 

8 Furtwangler, Meisterwerke, 171. 

x 


306 | GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


same building, as in the two-storied temple at Sparta.! 
Temples with more than one story were very rare. Pau- 
sanias speaks of the one at Sparta as the only one known 
to him, although so important a temple as that of Apollo 
near Miletos? had superposed rooms at least in one 
portion of the temple. Crypts (xpumtar‘), subterranean 
chapels or treasuries, though uncommon, occur occasion- 


Fig. 350. — Plan of the Old Temple of Athena, Athens. 


ally, as in the Tholos at Ea rate: and in the Temple of 
Zeus at Aizanoi. 

The triple temple (vacos tpimdods), and more complex 
types, may have been represented in Greece as they were 
in Italy. But the prevailing tendency was against them. 
Complex groups of cult statues, as in the temple near 
Lykosoura,? or side chapels (xadrddes) for separate 
images, as in the Heraion at Olympia,* were preferred 
to complex structures. 

Round temples (@0er01, oikjuata mepipeph) were not 
uncommon, though generally of small, dimensions. At 
Corinth a circular building was dedicated to Palaimon ; 


1 Paus., ITI, 15, 10. 2 Haussoullier, 92-94, Pl. 13. 
8 Paus., VIII, 87; Frazer, Paus., V, 622; Damieljs.a7.0.. 
(1904), 41-57. 4 Paus., V, 17, 1-3; Olympia, II, 27, Taf. 18-28. 


MONUMENTS 307 


at Sparta! such a building contained images of Zeus and 
Aphrodite; at Epidauros? the Tholos (Fig. 351), called 
also the Altar (@vpéAn), was a beautiful structure built 
by Polykleitos the younger; at Olympia the Philippeion? 
was a circular building of semi-religious character; and 
at Delphi the Tem- 

ple of Athena Pro- 
naia,* a charming ex- 
ample of a circular 
temple. 

The larger of these 
buildings, like the 
Tholos at Epidauros, | 
were provided with | 
an internal colonnade — 
which aided in the 
support of the roof 
usually of conical 
form. In _ external 
appearance, a_ Cir- 
cular temple might 
consist of a cella | 
without a colon- Fia. 351. — Plan of the Tholos at Epidauros. 
nade (dmtepos), as 
was the case at Delphi; or of a circular colonnade with- 
out a cella, inaptly called monopteros (jovertepos) by 
Vitruvius;® or, like the Tholos at Epidauros and the 
Philippeion, of a cella with a colonnade (vepéztepos). 

Cruciform temples existed only in germ in ancient 


1 Paus., IIT, 12, 11; Frazer, Paus., UI, 325. 
2 Lechat et Defrasse, 95-128 ; Cavvadias, 13-16. 3 Olympia, II, 129-138. 
4 Homolle, Temp. Ath. Pron., 4. 5 Vitruvius, IV, 8, 1. 


308 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


times. But something of this character may be recog- 
nized in the projecting lateral porches (apootaces) of 
the Erechtheion,! and is possibly described by Vitruvius? 
in the phrase, “columnis adiectis dextra ac sinistra ad 
umeros pronal.” 

Besides the cella, a characteristic feature of a Greek 
temple was the base (xpn7is) on which it was set. The 
variations of the base are, however, of little value in es- 
tablishing types. In some cases the stepped base occurs 
only in front of the temple, in others it is carried around 
all sides. The character of the approach to the principal 
entrance of a temple also varied from a gently inclined 
ramp to steps of uncomfortable height. As we have seen 
in a previous chapter, the number of steps in the krepi- 
doma varied according to no set law. Vitruvius? directs 
that the steps in front of a temple be uneven, so that the 
first and last step be made with the right foot, but this 
superstition, though it may have been a very ancient one, 
seems to have had little influence in determining the char- 
acter of the Greek temple base. 

The most obvious characteristic of the Greek temple 
was its porch, and the variations of this feature have been 
long recognized as the basis for distinguishing various 
types. These may be distributed into two general classes: 
non-peripteral and peripteral porches. 

Non-peripteral porches are those which do not make 
the entire circuit of the temple cella. Of these there are 
several varieties. The simplest is generally known as a 
porch in antis (€v 7apacrdow), and is treated as an en- 
closure with lateral walls terminated by antae (7apa- 


1 Doerpfeld, Ath. Mitt., XXIX (1904), 101. | 
2 Vitruvius, IV, 8, 4. 8 Tbid., Ill, 4, 4. 


3% 


MONUMENTS 309 


orades). The temple itself, characterized by its porch, 
was called a vaos év twapactdowv. The number of columns 
between the antae varied. One column sufficed for one 
of the chapels of a tepds oixos at Priene;! two columns 
were common, as in the temples at Rhamnous; three 
occur in the inner porches of the Enneastylos at Paes- 
tum; four in the pronaos of the Temple of Apollo near 
Miletos; and six at the Temple of Amphiaraos at Oropos.? 
Peculiar modifications of these types are found in the 
Temple of Diana Laphria at Messene* with its double 


antae, and in a temple near Kourno® with its false antae. 


Fia. 352. — Plan of the Temple of Artemis, Eleusis. 


In many temples, as in the Temple of Artemis at 
Eleusis (Fig. 852), a porch in antis was applied at both 
ends of the cella. The porch was styled prostyle 
(apeoturos) when, as in the so-called Temple of Em- 
pedocles at Selinous (Fig. 353), the lateral walls were 

1 Priene, 173. 

2 Koldewey und Puchstein, 17, Fig. 15. 


8 Frazer, Paus., I, 466. 
# Reinach-Lebas, Arch. Pelop., I, Pls. 2-3. B Ibids, LU, Pie 9. 


310 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


partially or entirely omitted, and the front consisted in a 
complete colonnade. When a colonnade was apphed in 
the rear as well as in front of a temple, as was the case 
with the Temple of Athena Nike at Athens, the type was 
called amphiprostyle (audiurpoorvaAos). A very unusual 
form of a non-peripteral, or partially 
peripteral, porch may be seen in 
the Temple of Athena at Sounion,} 
where a portico was attached to 
the front and one of the sides of the 
temple cella. ~ | 
Peripteral porches extended 
around the entire temple cella. A 
temple with such a porch was 
called peripteral (vads epimrtepos) 
or, in view of its columns, peristyle 
(mepiotvros). ~It seems hardly 
| likely, as Lechat? supposes, that 
Fic. 353.— Plan of the the Greek temple evolved natur- 
eee ee ally from the in antis type, through 
the double in antis, to the pe- 
ripteral type. If this had been the case, the temple 
cella and its surrounding porch would have been in 
. accord with each other from the first. It is more likely 
that the peripteral porch was deliberately applied to the 


temple as a sign of religious distinction? — possibly sug- 
gested by the Egyptian royal aedicula —and that a con- _ 


siderable time elapsed before it became properly adjusted 
to the temple cella. The variations of the peripteral 


1Staes, Hph. Arch., 1900, col. 122, Pl. 8. 


2 Lechat, Le Temple Grec, 28-30. 
3 Noack, Neue Jhb., I (1898), 581; Jhb., XI (1896), 283. 


MONUMENTS B12 


porch were not many. Ordinarily it was supported by 
a single row of columns, as in the Temple of Zeus at 
Olympia (Fig. 354). Sometimes, as in the Temple of 
Zeus at Akragas, the porch was omitted and the cella 
walls were decorated with engaged columns and entabla- 
tures, so as to suggest a peripteral porch. Such temples 
were styled pseudoperipteral (.pevdorepimrepos). The 
Temple of Zeus at Akragas was completely pseudope- 


Fia. 354. — Plan of the Temple of Zeus, Olympia. 


ripteral; the Temple of Fortuna Virilis at Rome and the 
Maison Carée at Nimes were only partially so. When 
the peripteral porch was constructed with a double row 
of columns, the temple was called dipteral (6dértepos). 
The Temple of Apollo near Miletos and the Olympi- 
eion at Athens were examples of this class. When a 
peripteral temple by a wide porch and a frontal colon- 
nade of eight or ten columns suggested the dipteral ar- 
rangement without possessing it, the building was called 
pseudodipteral (yrevdodiarepos). The invention is attrib- 
uted to the architect Hermogenes,! and is well illustrated 
by the Temple of Artemis at Magnesia (Fig. 355). The 


1 Vitruvius, III, 3, 8. 


812 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


type, however, seems to date from an earlier period, as 
the Greek Temple at Pompeii,! even if correctly restored 
as hexastyle, was essentially pseudodipteral. 

In examining the plans of temples it may be observed 
that the peripteral porch was applied to buildings of very 
different types. Thus, in Temple D at Selinous, it sur- 


aa | aa) SN 
a SS] ed 


Na 


Fic. 355. — Plan of the Temple of Artemis, Magnesia. 


rounds a temple in antis; in the Temple of Zeus at 
Olympia, one doubly in antis; in Temple C, Selinous, 
a prostyle; and in the Parthenon, an amphiprostyle 
temple. 

Another classification of temples notes merely the 
number of columns exhibited in the facade. ‘Thus the 
Temple of Artemis at Eleusis, which has two columns 
only, is called distyle; the Temple of Athena Nike, ex- 
hibiting four columns, tetrastyle; a coin of Abdera? 


1'Von Duhn und Jacobi, Taf. 2. 2 Stieglitz, I, 189; II, 48, note p. 


MONUMENTS 313 


shows a pentastyle temple; the Theseion at Athens was 
hexastyle; the Temple at Thorikos, heptastyle; the 
Parthenon, octastyle; the so-called Basilica at Paestum, 
enneastyle; and the Temple of Apollo near Miletos, deca- 
style. Philo’s Porch at Eleusis was dodecastyle. 

A final character, by means of which Greek temples 
were classified, was the roof. They were usually com- 
pletely covered, but very large buildings, like the Temple 
of Apollo at Miletos and the Olympieion at Athens, 
and possibly some smaller ones like the Apollo Temple 
_ at Phigaleia, were hypaethral! (vaiOpos, vrrat@pios ), 
that is, in part, at least, roofless. In such instances 
the statue of the divinity could be sheltered in a special 
aedicula, as was probably the case at Miletos, or in a 
special room, as at Phigaleia. 

The amount of light which entered through the door 
was deemed sufficient for the purposes of the Greek cult. 
It is, accordingly, unnecessary, with Fergusson,” to imagine 
for the Greek temple a clerestory system of lighting. 
The roof, however, was sometimes lighted by windows, as 
in the Temple of Concordia at Akragas. 

Greek temples had various accessories. Ordinarily 
they were provided with altars, chthonic temples with 
pits; oracular shrines had sacred trees or caves; cura- 
tive establishments had their hospices and colonnades; 
and memorial temples were erected over or near some 
hero’s burial-place. All temples might have their dwell- 
ings for priests. 

Temples were frequently set upon sacred. ground 
(réevos) and surrounded by a wall, with a more or less 


1 Doerpfeld, Ath. Mitt., XVI (1891), 384-844. 
2 Fergusson, Pls. 3, 4. 


314 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


imposing entrance and covered walks. At Athens and 
Olympia groups of temples were contained within the 
sacred enclosure. ! 

The value which the Greeks set upon the orientation 
of their temples is not always obvious. The astronomical 
theory of Penrose,! that the axis was originally directed 
towards some star in the heavens, leads to extravagant 
conclusions, and the geographical theory of Choisy,” 


that temples of Aphrodite faced Kythera and those of 


Apollo faced Delos, had certainly a very limited appli- 
cation. That a solar tradition of some sort influenced 
the orientation of Greek temples is evident from the fact 
that in most cases the facade was toward the east. In 


the case of double temples, set back to back, such orienta- 


tion for both parts was manifestly impossible. Hellen- 
istic sanctuaries appear to have been placed with less 
regard to the sun than those of earlier date. Accord- 
ing to Vitruvius® the courses of rivers and the directions 
of public streets are of more importance than solar con- 
siderations in determining the axes of temples. 

4, GOVERNMENTAL BurILpines. — Although some light 
has been cast on this subject by recent excavations, it is 
not possible, at present, to give a satisfactory sketch of 
Greek governmental buildings as a whole. 

The foundation of Greek government was in the voting 
assembly of the people; the superstructure was the de- 
liberative council, the magistrates, the judges, and other 
officers. } 

The place of assembly for the voters (ékxAnoltacTnpiov) 
was the market-place, the theatre, or a specially prepared 


1 Penrose, Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc.,Vol. 190 (A), 48. 
2 Choisy, I, 425. 3 Vitruvius, IV, 5. 


MONUMENTS B15 


area, like the Pnyx! at Athens. The only requirements 
were a platform for the speakers, and standing room, or 
seats, for the voters. ‘The Bouleuterion (Sovreuvtypior), 
or Council House, on the other hand, required a roof. 
The type may be studied from the ruins at Priene 


Fic. 356. — Bouleuterion at Priene. 


(Figs. 356, 357) and Miletos. At Priene the building 
was almost square. On one side was a niche with a raised 
stage (Aoyeiov, Bjua) and lateral passages (apodor), in 
the centre an open space with an altar, and on the three 
remaining sides were banked rows of benches (@4axoz, 
Bd@pa), and at the top a surrounding passage (dsdfopa). 
At Miletos,? although the exterior of the building was 


1 Crow, A.S.A. Papers, IV, 207-260. 2 Milet, 25-80. 


316 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


rectangular, the banks of seats were arranged like those of 


a theatre, in concentric curves. In front of the Council 
House was an open court, entered through an imposing gate- 
way and surrounded by covered porches. Buildings of a 
similar character have been found at Termessos ! and else- 
where. At Megalopo- 
lis? the Thersilion, built 
for the meetings of the 
Arcadian Ten Thou- 
sand, was constructed 
with rows of wooden 
seats sloping from three 
sides towards a central 
area, while a stage and 
lateral passages were on 
the fourth side. 

A long, rectangular 
plan? was also em- 
ployed for Bouleuteria. 
In such cases the seats 
sloped from two sides of the building. Of this type 
was probably the Phokikon, near Daulis,* in which there 
were long colonnades and, from the columns, banks of seats 
rising to each wall. The Curia at Pompeii® appears to 
be a variant of this type, with decorative columns at the 
side walls instead of colonnades. In this case movable 
seats were probably used. 

Governmental buildings were frequently arranged in 


‘Drea 


Fig. 357. — Plan of Bouleuterion at Priene. 


? 
ies ee meee INT 


Sa 
fee) 
ae 
=m 
Sax 
ae 
Sa 
as 
| 2 ed 
a=, 

=, 

0 

t 

é 
eee 
ne 
I iain 
== 
eae 


1 Lanckoronski, IT, 438, 99. 

2 Frazer, Paus., 1V, 338-846; Schultz, 17- 23. 

8 Vinee A priya 

4 Paus., X, 5, 1-2. 5 Mau, 121. 


MONUMENTS 317 


groups, as the so-called Bouleuterion! with its adjoining 
buildings at Olympia, or three buildings at Eleusis,? 
or the six governmental offices adjoining the Philippian 
colonnade at Megalopolis.2 The buildings so associ- 
ated with the Bouleuteria may have varied in differ- 
ent cities. Not far 
away, however, from 
the Bouleuterion 
should be the Pry- 
taneion. 

The  Prytaneion 4 
(mputaveiov) was the 
official meeting-place 
of the Prytaneis. It 
contained the _ state 
hearth in which per- 
petual fire was kept 
burning; it was also a 
dining place reserved 
for the Prytaneis, 
honored citizens, and 
state guests. It prob- 
ably originated in the royal palace, and continued to 
serve some of the purposes of a private house. If there 
was a typical form of Prytaneion, it is natural that 
it should resemble in some degree a private house. 
Priene furnishes us the most definite example (Fig. 358). 
Here the building consists of a peristyle court with rooms 


Fic. 358. — Plan of Prytaneion at Priene. 


1 Olympia, II, 76-78; Frazer, Paus., III, 636. 

2 Frazer, Paus., I, 511. 3 Paus., VIII, 30, 6. 
_ 4G. Hageman, De Graecorum prytaneis, Vratislaviae, 1881; J. G. 
Frazer, Journal of Philology, XIV (1884), 146 ff. 


318 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


opening into it from three sides. The Prytaneia at Mag- 
nesia! and at Olympia? are of similar form. A second 
type of Prytaneion was the circular building (@eXos, cxas). 
Such was the Tholos at Athens,? and the Common Hearth 


of the Arcadians at Mantineia.* This type was preferred 


by the Romans for their temples of Vesta. 

For various other officials were erected separate buildings, 
such as the Thesmotheteion, the Strategion, and the Epho- 
reion. Law courts® (d:cactnpia) were held sometimes in 
the open, sometimes in closed buildings. There seems to 


have been no typical form of building for this function of 


government, although there were certain features which 
characterized these halls of justice, such as the benches on 
which the judges sat, the raised tribunals for the advo- 
cates, and the bar or railing which separated the court 
from the public. : 

5. COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: THE AGORA AND STOA. 


— Greek trade was both wholesale and retail. The whole- 
sale merchants sold their goods by samples. The locality 


where such goods were exhibited was called the Deigma. 
These merchants were often importers, and had their store- 
houses at the seaports. Remains of some of these may be 
seen at Delos. For the use of these traders were also 
erected colonnades, such as those at the Peiraieus.® 

Retail merchants and those who sold their own products 


sought the agora, or market-place? (ayopa), which in most 


1 Magnesia, 112, 1387, Taf. 2. 2 Olympia, II, 58-60. 
$ Paus., 1; 6, 1; Frazer, Paus:, 11) 76: eg 

4 Paus., VIII, 9, 5; Frazer, Paus., IV, 441. 

5 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Dikastai ; Smith, Dict., s.v. Dicasterion. 
6 Frazer, Paus., II, 24. 


7 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Agora; eae 164 ; Curtius, A.Z., vI | 


(1848), 292. 


MONUMENTS 319 


Greek cities was the heart of the town. The earliest type 
of market-place was an open space, where each merchant 
could expose his wares from a booth, or tent, and where 
shade was provided by means of trees. It had no well- 
defined form, andits functions were manifold. Temples 
and altars were erected in it; here also was likely to be 
found a group of governmental buildings. The agora was 
often peopled with statues. But the religious, political, 
and commercial interests in growing cities could not long 
continue to occupy the same ground. Hence they were 
separated, although the separation was not always com- 
plete. | 

In the classic and Hellenistic periods the agora became 
an architectural feature in Greek cities. The open space 
was more or less surrounded by porticoes, into which 
opened store-rooms. The agora at Priene! had covered 
walks on three sides; those at Magnesia (Fig. 359), 
Knidos,? and at Aphrodisias? had them on all four sides. 

The form of the agora in Hellenistic cities corresponded 
with the general disposition of the streets, and was usually 
square or rectangular. Agoras with curved boundaries, 
however, existed in Asia Minor,* and a circular one at 
Constantinople.® Those of the archaic period were less 
regular in form. Pausanias® describes that of Olympia 
as built in “the Older Style,” with separate colonnades, 
and streets between them. In the later or Ionian type 
the colonnades were united so as to form an enclosure 
without streets. 


1 Priene, 185, Taf. 18. 2 Newton, II, 306, Pl. 50. 

8 Jon. Antiq., III, Ch. 2, Pl. 4. 

4 Sterrett, A.S.A., II, 302; cf. B.C.H., VI (1882), 492; VII (1883), 
368. 5 Zosimos, II, 30. 6 Paus., VI, 24, 2. 


“*BISOUSBI 1B BIOS JO ULI — “6G ‘DIT 


MONUMENTS 321 


The stoa (oToa), or porch, although associated with 
temples, political buildings, theatres, and other buildings, 
was the chief architectural feature of the agora. It 


Fic. 360.— Stoa of Eumenes, Pergamon. Restoration. 


existed in various typical forms. The simplest was the 
F single-aisled porch (sovdateyos), the pent roof of which 
| sloped down from a wall to a single colonnade. Of this 
type were the Eastern and the Western Stoa of the agora 


Xi 


322 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


at Priene.! This type was usually single-storied (povo- 
ateyos), but it might be two-storied (dioTeyos), as was 
the Stoa of Eumenes at Pergamon (Fig. 360). In two- 
storied porticoes the upper columns, were posed directly 
above the lower ones, but differed from them in style and 
proportions.? : 

A second type was the two-aisled stoa (atoa dicttxos), 
in which the double aisle resulted from the introduction of 
an interior colonnade. In some instances, as in the Philip- 
pian Colonnade 
at Megalopolis,? 
the outer and 
inner row of 
- columns corre- 

sponded in size, 
number, and 
position. In 
-this type the 


probably re- 
tained. Inother 
: cases, as in the 
Fig. 361. — Plan of double Stoa, Magnesia. Stoa of Oro- 


phernes at Priene and in the agora at Magnesia (Fig. 361), 
the inner colonnade consisted of larger columns, which 
corresponded in position with every alternate column of 
the outer row. We may believe that this central colon- 


nade supported the ridge-beam of a gable roof, which — 


covered a single-storied porch. 
A third type stoa was the three-aisled, which resulted 


1 Priene, Taf. 138. 2 Vitruvius, V, 1, 3. 
8 Frazer, Paus., 1V, 321. 


pent roof was 


bailey Se ek dele ee ee SPT sea 
POS, ME ee re on, Oe GARE lhe Saale ay RO oe eee ae 


ok ia celia oT 5 


MONUMENTS B25 


from the introduction of two inner colonnades. Of this 
type was one of the porticoes seen by Pausanias! at Olym- 
pia, and that built by Epigone at Mantineia.? It has been 
assumed? that the Stoa Basileios at Athens was, in its 
general disposition, a prototype of the basilicas of Roman 
and Christian architecture, and also that basilicas must 
have existed in many Greek cities in the Hellenistic 
period*; but excavations have not yet established the 
truth of these reasonable assumptions. 

A stoa with more than three aisles was certainly rare, 
although Texier® restored the peribolos at Kangovar, 
and Curtius the Aristandrian Colonnade at Megalopolis,® 
as having three aisles enclosed by four rows of columns. 
Antioch‘, because of the double portico on each side of 
its principal street, is said to have had a four-aisled stoa. 
At least three basilicas at Rome were five-aisled. 

In elevation two stories seem to have been the normal 
limit, but at Aegae ® and at Alinda ® porticoes were erected 
on top of two-storied buildings. 

A new variety of stoa was produced by developing a 
porch on both sides of a central wall. This was called 
the double stoa (otoa éi7AH). Pausanias! discusses a 
stoa of this kind at Elis known as the Corcyraean Colon- 
nade. 

The development of trade demanded the establishment 
of special markets, such as the grain market at Athens. 
It also stimulated private hospitality and led to the 


1Paus., VI, 24, 2. 5 Texier, Arménie, I, 161. 
2¥Frazer, Paus., IV, 211, 214. 6 Frazer, Paus., IV, 321. 
8 Lange, 60-104. 7 Sittl, 375, note 5. 


4 Mau, in Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Basilica. 8 Bohn-Schuchhardt, Fig. 24, 
9 Reinach-Lebas, Arch. As. Min., II, Pls. 4-5. 10Paus., VI, 24, 4. 


824 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


erection of inns or khans (kataywy.a), hotels (wavéoxeia), 
and restaurants (ca7mrn)eia). 

6. BUILDINGS FOR PHysicAL CULTURE. — Athletic 
games flourished in Greece from an early period. Wrest- 
ling, boxing,, foot-racing, jumping, weight-throwing, ball 


XIV XII xm xI x 


XV o = 
XVI 
@ 
e e 
e e VIII 
XVII ¢@ e 
e @ 
e 
. 
. vu 
e 
XVIII $ 
@ 
e@ 
e 
° vi 
xIx ¥ 
@#e2e@e02008 008808828 
I Vv Nn 
ee e@ 


Fig. 362. — Plan of Palaistra at Olympia. 


play, and other games, some of which may have been 
learned from Egyptians or Phoenicians, were practised 
in Greece from Homeric days. Those which the Phaea- 
cians instituted in honor of Odysseus! took place in 


1 Od., VII. 


MONUMENTS B25 


the agora, but more frequently a levelled piece of 
ground was set apart for athletic purposes. In primitive 
times no covered structures for this purpose were thought 
necessary. In the archaic and classic periods buildings 
were erected which exhibited the essential features of the 
later gymnasium.! The surviving stone and marble 
examples belong to the Hellenistic period. 

The palaistra? (avadatotpa), or wrestling house, fol- 
lowed the type of the agora and consisted of a rectangular 
court surrounded by colonnades with adjoining rooms. 
Olympia? furnishes the best example of the type (Fig. 
562). It was known as the square (Tetpdywvov) and had 
more or less imposing entrances (I, I]) (ape@vpa) with 
adjoining porters’ lodges (III, IV) (wvA@pia), a commons 
room (XII) (é€¢nfetov) devoted to the use of young men, 
a bath-room (X) (Aovtpwv) provided with a tank or with 
a trough as at Priene (Fig. 863). There was also a 
dressing-room (XIX) (azodutypiov), a room where the 
athletes were anointed with oil (XIIT) (éAato@éouov), and 
another (XI), the konistra (xovictpa or Komortnp.ov), 
where the athletes were rubbed with dust. These two 
rooms, according to Vitruvius,‘ adjoined the Ephebeion, or 
commons room. Other rooms, when closed, were probably 
used for storing the athletic implements and, when open 
toward the court, for lounging or meeting rooms, where 
athletic instruction or literary entertainment might be 
given. A somewhat simpler palaistra of the second cen- 
tury B.C. adjoined the stadion at Priene;® another of the 
same period was at Delos.® In all these buildings it may 


1 Krause, Gymnastik, I, 93. 4 Vitruvius, V, 11, 2. 
2 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Gymnasium. ° Priene, 265. 
8 Olympia, IT, 113. 6 B.C.H., XV (1891), 246. 


326 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


be observed that the bath was subsidiary to the main pur- 
pose of the building. 

Bath-rooms and bathing establishments (Sadaveia) of 
various kinds, public and private, existed from earliest 
days in Greece. At Tiryns! a wooden lined bath-room 


Fic. 363. — Water troughs in gymnasium, Priene. 


contained fragments of a terra-cotta tub similar to that 
found at Mycenae.2, At Knossos® there were not only 
bath-rooms for portable tubs, but also gypsum-lined, 
sunken tanks reached by steps. Similar bath-rooms were 
found at the palace at Palaikastro + in Crete. 

1 Schliemann, Tiryns, 230-232. 2 Priene, 293. 


3 B.S.A., VIII (1901-1902), 52-53. 
* Ibid., IX (1902-1903), 278, 291, Pl. 6. 


MONUMENTS oat 


A simple type of public bathing establishment adjoins 
the agora at Assos.! It consists of a long corridor, upon 
which open thirteen square rooms. In one at least of 
these rooms water was introduced from an elevation so as 
to provide a douche. In others may have been the large 
vases used for 
bucket douches. 
Vase-paintings 
provide us with 
illustrations of 
various kinds of 
bathing. 

Hot’ baths 
(Oepua Rovtpa), 
mentioned by 
Homer ® but not 
generally prac- 
tised by the 
Greeks of the. 
classic period,* became more popular in the Hellenistic and 
Roman periods. Actual remains of bath-houses in Greek 
lands are rare. ‘The unfinished excavations at Oiniadai® 
in Akarnania (Fig. 364) present an example of a hot-bath 
establishment dating apparently from the second century 
B.C. In this building is a rectangular room with a cold- 
water pool, corresponding to the frigidarium of Vitruvius ;® 
a large circular room, possibly the tepidarium; a smaller 
circular room, the calidarium; and still smaller rooms 


Fia. 364. — Plan of Bath at Oiniadai. 


1 Bacon, Assos, 8, 23, 25. 

2 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Balneum. * Iliad, XIV, 6: 
4 Herod., IV, 75; Aristotle, Problemata, II, 29-82. 

5 Sears, in A.J.A., VIII (1904), 216-226. SV iirayits, V1.7) 


328 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


which may have served as anointing rooms. In the cen- 
tre of the circular rooms probably stood large kettles or 
caldrons of boiling water, each provided with a cover. 
From these hot water may have been conveyed to the cir- 
cular basins in the floor. Remains of similar circular bath- 
rooms are found at Eretria,! where the basins in front of 
fixed seats were evidently arranged as foot-tubs. Similar 
tubs are found in the loutron of the palaistra and in a 
private house at Priene.? 

The Akarnanian type of bath is seen in a more developed 
state at Pompeii (Fig. 365). In the Stabian Baths, the — 
small baths near the Forum, and the Central Baths,? cir- 
cular or domical rooms as well as rectangular rooms are 
found, the circular rooms being sometimes employed for 
the cold and sometimes for the hot vapor bath. Various — 
improvements were introduced, such as small vaults in the 
walls of the apodyterion, to serve as lockers; the intro- 
duction of hot water by means of pipes; and especially 
the use of furnaces, the hot air from which circulated 
beneath the floors and through the hollow walls. 

In Asia Minor the baths of the late Greek and Roman 
periods departed so far from the Assos type as to be hardly 
recognizable. ‘The so-called gymnasium (yupvdovov) at 


Alexandria Troas* and the Opistholeprian Bath at 


Ephesos® retained the long corridor into which the prin- 

cipal rooms open, but the central court was replaced by 

rooms which correspond to the Ephebeion and the other 

apartments of a palaistra. To these were added enlarged 

facilities for bathing. In view of its general plan, such a 
1 A.J.A., V (1901), 96. 2 Priene, 270, 292. 3 Mau, 180-206. 


* Koldewey, in Ath. Mitt., IX (1884), 36-48, Taf. 2, 3. 
5 Falkener, 88. 


MONUMENTS 329 


building might be styled a winter palaistra or gymnasium, 
but its disposition as a bathing establishment was suffi- 


Fia. 365. — Plan of small Bath at Pompeii. 


ciently emphatic to justify us in considering it a prototype 
of the great Roman baths, such as those of Caracalla or of 
Diocletian. 

Foot-races and chariot-races required specially prepared 


A 


330 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


courses, known as the stadion and the hippodrome. The 
stadion (oradvov), so named from the measure of length 
equivalent to six hundred Greek feet, provided seats 
for spectators and judges, and a course with start and 
finish for the runners. When practicable, a valley was 
selected, from the sloping sides of which the spectators 
could view the races. Where nature did not provide 


a suitable slope, an artificial mound of earth was — 
erected as a theatron (@éatpov), or view place, for the spec- _ 
tators. Here they sat upon the ground or upon wooden » 


Fic. 366. — The Stadion, Delphi. 


or stone benches. It was not until the second century of 


our era that Herodes Atticus (104-180 A.p.) provided the ee 


stadia at’ Athens and at Delphi with marble seats. The 
seats of the Isthmian Stadion were also of white marble. 


These seats resembled those of the theatre, in being ar- 
ranged in successive tiers reached by flights of steps at. 


ee MLAS oe ae ee 


ee 


iT Ne OE 


ae 


MONUMENTS Dok. 


regular intervals. At the base was a parapet and some- 
times a drain. An interesting feature in the design of the 
theatron was that at the extremities of the stadion the two 


_banks of seats were drawn closer together than at the 


middle. This appears to have been the case at Olympia! 
and also at Priene.? This feature is retained in the recon- 
structed marble stadion at Athens, where the two rows of 
seats approach each other on a curve which suggests the 
entasis of a column. The form of the stadion was in 
some cases, as at Olympia and at Epidauros, a long rectan- 
gle ; elsewhere, as at Athens and at Delphi (Fig. 366), the 
tiers of seats were continued at one end on a semicircular 
plan (ogevddvn), so as to accommodate a larger number of 
spectators. At Aphrodisias and at Laodikeia the tiers of 
seats were arranged on this plan at both ends. Such a thea- 
tron is properly called an amphitheatron® (auqi0éatpor). 


Fic. 367. — The starting line of the Stadion, Olympia. 


At Priene, Messene, and at Aphrodisias, covered porticoes 
were built at the summit of the theatron. 

The stadion was provided with an aphesis (adeous), or 
starting-place, and finish (répua). At Olympia (Fig. 
367) there appears to have been an aphesis at each end 
of the stadion,‘ so that the finish might be opposite the 
judge’s stand, whether the runners went once over the 
course or traversed it twice. At the start the runners, 
arranged in line, were separated from each other by a 


1 Olympia, II, 638. 3 Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Amphitheatrum, 
2 Priene, 264. 4 Olympia, II, 64. 


Doe GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


series of low posts which carried cross-bars. At Olympia 
the holes for wooden posts occur at regular intervals in 
a series of marble sills. The blocks also show parallel 
furrows by means of which the runners may have been 
able to obtain a quick start. ‘The cross-bars as barriers 
for runners are represented in a drawing from the Codex 
Ursinianus in the Vatican, and in a bas-relief in the 
Lateran.! At Epidauros iron posts appear to have been 
used. ‘These were replaced in later days by semi-columns 
of the Ionic order.2. At Priene® a device of the Olym- 
pian type was replaced later by a more imposing aphesis, 
in which marble piers were substituted for the wooden 
posts. When the runners traversed the course twice, the 
turn may have been made around a single post; or, as 
the arrangements at Olympia appear to indicate, each 
runner kept to his own track and made the turn about a 
separate post. The finish was marked by a rope or line 
drawn opposite the seats reserved for the judges. 


The hippodrome* (i7éédpopuos), or track for horse and ~ 


chariot races, was an enlarged stadion. The theatron 
was similarly disposed, although regular tiers of seats 
may not have been built until the Roman period. The 
course was necessarily wider than the stadion, and double 
its length. Special devices were necessary to secure a 
fair start. Pausanias® describes the aphesis of the hip- 
podrome at Olympia as resembling the prow of a vessel, 
the beak (éu8orov) of which was turned towards the 
course and contained stalls (of«nwata) from which the 


1 Kern, in Rim. Mitt., V (1890), 150-156, Taf. 7. 


2 Cavvadias, Asklep. Temp., 96. 8 Priene, 260. 
4 Krause, Gymnastik, I, 147-168; Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Hippo- 
dromos. 5Paus., VI, 20, 10-15. 


‘a 


~ 


i 


MONUMENTS BOO 


horses issued. The ropes or barriers of the stalls fur- 
thest from the 
beak were lowered 
first, then those 
of the adjoining 
stalls, and finally 
those nearest the 
beak (Vig. 368). 
A second device 
necessary for the 
hippodrome was 
the spina, which 
consisted of a low 
wall in the central 
axis of the course. 
This protected the 
outgoing and re- 
turning chariots 
from clashing 
with each other. 
A turning-post 
(viooa, KapTTNP) 
was set at either 
end of the spina. 


ce 
‘The spina of the inive 
hippodrome at 4 “t Ny 
Constantinople ; 
still Survives. dak Sep etaw o 


While no remains 
of a spina have 
been found in 
earlier Greek hippodromes, it may be assumed that some 


FiG. 368, — Plan of a Hippodrome. 


334 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


effective method was provided to avoid the clashing of 
chariots. The finish, as in the stadion, consisted in cross- 
ing a line in front of the seats reserved for the judges. 

7. BUILDINGS FOR INTELLECTUAL AND SOCIAL PuR- 
POSES. — Intellectual and social demands led to the estab- 
lishment of special buildings for schools, lbraries, clubs, 
theatres, and music or concert halls. 

Greek education! in the earlier periods aimed chiefly 
at the production of soldiers. Hence gymnastics was a 
fundamental branch of education, and with it training 
in poetry, music, reading, and writing were associated. 
The palaistra, or gymnasium, naturally represented the 
school and developed so as to include literary and philo- 
sophical exercises. At Athens the Academy, where 
Plato taught, and the Lyceum, the school of Aristotle, 
and the Herakleion or Kynosarges, the school of Antis- 
thenes, were all’ primarily athletic establishments, quad- 
rangular courts surrounded by colonnaded porticoes. 
Instruction appears to have been also given in the public 
agora, and in private houses, but the teaching place 
(ddackanreiov) had no fixed type. At Teos, where teach- 
ers of various kinds were paid from the public treasury, 
the formal examinations to test the progress of students 
were held in the gymnasium or in the bouleuterion. 

In the Hellenistic period educational establishments be- 
gan to assume more specific form. The University to the 
Muses? (Movcetov), dedicated at Alexandria by Ptolemy 
Philadelphos about 280 B.c., had, according to Strabo, 
a portico (aepimrartos), a lecture-room (é&édpa), and a large 
hall (oicos péyas). Since fourteen thousand students at 
a time are said to have pursued here the study of litera- 


1 Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. Educatio. - 2§trabo, XVIII, 794. 


CRY pot 
een ee 


wre ox “nF yee ‘ 
a a tN So re 2 


Gal 


n ; - 
; 7 ae Wea ee 
Fe eT at a ee fen art eae) 


= rue 


oe 
feat 


. ~. é 
ers ee ow Hes Sasi late 
Peet aki” et mee” Geb ey 5 


I 


rr, 
t 
bis 

aS 

oy 


( c 
ae 
; 

Reaeat 


MONUMENTS 335 


ture, mathematics, astronomy, and medicine, the building 
must have been more extensive than is indicated by Strabo. 
The so-called Stoa of Hadrian at Athens,! with its exedrae 
and large rooms, appears to be a building of similar char- 
acter. 

Greek libraries (Ai Brv0PHKat or atroOjKat BiBriwv) be- 
gan with private collections of books, such as those 


Fic. 369. — Plan of Library at Pergamon. 


made by Polykrates of Samos, Peisistratos of Athens, or 
Aristotle. Such libraries required a closed room with 
shelves, cabinets, or closets in which to store papyrus and 
parchment rolls. The large libraries of later days, such 
as those at Pergamon and Alexandria, were furnished with 
reading-rooms, dwellings for the librarians, and cloistered 
walks. The library at Pergamon 2 (Fig. 369), established 


1 Harrison and Verrall, 197. 2 Pergamon, II, 56. 


336 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


by Eumenes II, affords a typical Greek solution of the 
library problem. It consisted of a series of rooms, some 
of which were evidently intended as dwellings, others for 
lectures, for reading, and for the storing of books. 
The room for the latter purpose has been identified by 
the holes in the walls in 
which were fastened the 
supports of the cabinets 
or shelves for which the 
foundation still exists 
(Fig. 3870). These rooms 
were preceded by a double 
portico. The Roman li- 
brary of C. Asinius Pollio 
was established in the 
atrium of the Temple of 
Liberty, and the two 
libraries founded by Au- 


SJ 
N 
N 


SSSSS 
Ss. 


H | 5 . NI 
: 4 ; N 
; S 
0 y 

: fl 4 8 
; : : N 
3 ‘ NY 
‘ ; S 

a x 
8 

\ RAY 


SSIS 


SIS 


WSS 


SASWG |. DAs 


me 


ESS 


SS8sy FAQs > 


nected with porticoes.! 
The club-house (Aéox7) 
met the social requirement 
of a place for conversation. As this want was also met in 
various other ways, there seems to be no fixed type for 


Fic. 370. — Book shelves at Pergamon, 
Restoration. 


such a building, and it is idle to speculate as to its form.? | 


Fortunately, the excavations at Delphi seem to have 
brought to light the most celebrated building of this 
class, the Lesche erected by the Knidians? (Fig. 371) 
and decorated with paintings by Polygnotos. It consisted 
of a single rectangular room, in the interior of which eight 


1 Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Bibliotheken. 2 Lange, 120. 
3’ Homolle, in B.C. H., XX (1896), 683-639; Frazer, Paus., V, 635. 


gustus were also con-— 


MONUMENTS 837 


pillars or columns helped to support the roof. Whether 
the paintings which adorned the walls were illuminated 
from an opening in the roof, from windows, or merely 
from the door cannot now be determined. 


Fia. 371. — Plan of the Lesche of the Knidians, Delphi. 


The Greek theatre! (@éatpov) was designed for the 
presentation of plays in which choral songs and dances 
were prominent features. The architect was called upon 
to provide a dancing ground for the chorus, an auditorium, 
or place for seating the spectators, and a skene with dress- 
ing-rooms for the actors. 

The fundamental feature was the orchestra (opynotpa), 
or dancing ground for the chorus; for this a level space was 
required. ‘The floor of the orchestra was usually of rolled 
or pounded earth. At Delos,? however, it was coated with 
plaster, and at Athens, in the Roman period, it was covered 
with a marble and mosaic pavement. When covered with 
sand for gladiatorial contests, it was known as the Konistra 
(4) xovictpa). In the centre of the orchestra was an altar 


1¥or bibliography consult the Preface to Haigh, The Attic Theatre. 
2 B.C.H., XVIII (1894), 163. 
Z 


338 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


around which moved the chorus. In the course of time 
the altar lost its central significance. At Priene it was 
relegated to the periphery of the orchestra; in later 
theatres it was often omitted altogether. The form of the 
orchestra was not invariably the same. At Thorikos! 


Fig. 372. — Plan of Theatre at Thorikos. 


* 


(Fig. 372) it was a rectangle with rounded ends, but in 
most Greek theatres of the classic period it was nearly 
if not entirely circular. The theatre of Dionysos at 
Athens,? though subjected to many changes, still retains 
some of the blocks of the retaining wall of a circular 


1 W. Miller, in A.S.A., IV, 1-34 ; Doerpfeld und Reisch, 110. 
2 Doerpfeld und Reisch, 366, Taf. 1; Haigh, 112, Fig. 3. 


DIM, ene ae art 


“Ar 


vee eR ee 


> 


MONUMENTS 339 


orchestra dating apparently as early as the sixth century. 
Epidauros (Fig. 373) has the distinction of exhibiting an 
orchestra whose circular form is emphasized by a ring of 
limestone. ‘This was decorated by a roundel moulding on 
the half of the circle towards the auditorium. Sucha ring 
may have proved a stumbling-block to the people entering 
and leaving the theatre and was elsewhere omitted. 

A special device by means of which actors could sud- 
denly make their appearance, or as suddenly disappear, 
was a subterranean passage (xpu777 elcodos ), connecting 
the orchestra and skene, and provided with steps at either 
end. These passages were probably closed with trap- 
doors. Examples of such subterranean passages are 
found at Eretria! and Sikyon.? 

Next in importance to the orchestra was the theatron 
(Géatpov), or view place, for the spectators. In fact, an 
orchestra and a theatron, the chief necessities of a Greek 
theatre, are all that are found in the theatre at Thorikos. 
The general requirement for a theatron was a sloping 
bank or hollow (xotdov), which could be further excavated, 
or built up, so as to furnish spectators with a view of 
the orchestra. Where necessary, it was supported by 
retaining walls. The excavated theatre had little or no 
exterior for architectural decoration. When, however, 
a theatre was constructed in a plain, as was the case 
with many late Greek and Roman theatres, the enclos- 
ing walls furnished an excellent field for architectural 
ornamentation. 

The plan of the theatron followed that of the orchestra. 
At Thorikos it was rectangular with irregularly rounded 


1 Brownson, in A..J..A., VI (1891), 275-280. 
2McMurtry, in A.J.A., V (1889), 278-279, 


ge a ear a eee. PN aR c SMT sn Th al el ee rae. oo ee Rs Soe? Set aie i hee Jo 
$ : . Nga wr i : 


ay ncn nomatiinn er 


GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


340 


MONUMENTS 341 


extremities, but elsewhere followed, in part at least, a 
circular plan. At Aspendos! it barely exceeded a semi- 
circle; at Sagalassos? it occupied two-thirds of a circle; 
at Athens® it resembled the end of a stadion, and con- 
sisted of semicircular banks of seats continued in straight 
lines towards the skene; at Epidauros# it followed the 
line of a three-centred curve (Fig. 874). This widened 
the diodos (déod0s), or passageway, at the base of the 
theatron, without sacrificing a continuous curvature in 
plan. At Epidauros, and elsewhere, beneath this passage- 
way was a channel, which carried off the surface drainage 
of the orchestra and of the theatron. At Athens the 
open drain between the theatron and the orchestral circle 
was less practical. 

The theatron in all large, and in some small, theatres 
was subdivided into the theatron proper and an epi- 
theatron (év@éatpov), or upper theatron, by means of 
diazomata (d:af@para), or horizontal passages. There is 
but one such dividing passage at Epidauros, and in most 
theatres of moderate size. Where two occur, as at Argos® 
and probably at Megalopolis,6 one was usually nar- 
rower than the other. At Epidauros, Megalopolis, and 
in general, the epitheatron was semicircular in plan and 
concentric to the theatron. At Delos, however, it 
terminates in a pointed arch, and at Athens in a horse- 
shoe arch. The block of seats was still further subdi- 
vided by the stairways («Adwaxes), which were known 
also as furrows (oAcko/). The stairways radiating from 
a common centre divided the block of seats into wedge- 

1QLanckoronski, I, Taf. 21. 4 Tbid., 122. 


2 Ibid., 11, Taf. 26. 5 Blouet, II, Pl. 58. 
3 Doerpfeld und Reisch, 42. 6 Megalopolis, 39-40, Fig. 27. 


342 


GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


HANNGUOCODOUONUROD ANDO OG UOLOGNOEDONE (Ti) 
1 


ATT 


1h 
BET IMT \ 


LIT 


oT) 


CHUUOGUGVULOOULEQUOUONRETICOVUUIUIOCODENVELIGEHILO BABB 


| Sa 
a) = 


briirtrini Tome TI Vonsvennuanevmserennveuaesrstean aint 
ian 
Me 
mbn 

a4 ~ =e = arth j 

mT weet wene i 
Corre tt 
QD ° rh 


° 5 10 20 30 . 
Fic. 374. — Plan of the Theatre at Epidauros. — 


MONUMENTS 343 


shaped sections (xepxides). As these wedges widened tow- 
ards the upper rows additional stairways were required. 
Thus at Epidauros the stairways were continued through 


Fic. 375. — Front seats in the Theatre of Dionysos, Athens. 


the epitheatron, where intermediate stairways (muécae 
KAiwakes) were added. Vitruvius generalizes this practice 
into the rule that above every horizontal passage the num- 
ber of stairways should be doubled. 


. 


344 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


The seats consisted of thronoi (@pdvo1, mpoddpar), or 
seats of honor, and the ordinary rows of benches (édpaz, 
ixpia, édodLa). ‘The former, which were marble chairs 
or benches with backs, were placed, at Priene, in the 
orchestra directly in front of the passage at the base 
of the theatron; at Megalopolis, in the theatron but on 
the level of the orchestra; and at Athens, slightly above 

the orchestra 

level. Occasion- 
- ally, as at Epi- 
; dauros, there 
was, at the base 
of the  epithe- 
atron, a second 
row of seats of 
honors ite 
thronoi were 
sometimes finely carved. Of this class that of the 
priest of Dionysos Eleuthereus at Athens (Fig. 375) 
is the most noteworthy. At Argos the form of the 
ordinary benches was of extreme simplicity, with risers 
and treads like an ordinary stairway. Usually, however, 
there was a depression in the face and top of each step 
to accommodate the feet of those seated in the next 
higher tier. Steps of this character are found in the 
theatres at Megalopolis, Athens, and Epidauros (Fig. 
376). In Asia Minor, as at Miletos (Fig. 377) and 
at Iassos, the benches were given more decorative form by 
the use of -double-curved profiles, and near the stairways 
were terminated with claw feet. Beyond the topmost 
bench was a passageway, terminated, at Delos, by slabs — 
of stone posed vertically and crowned by a capstone or 


a - | 
NANG Y 


MONUMENTS 345 


Fic. 377. — Benches of the Theatre at Miletos. 


346 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


railing. In late Greek and Roman theatres, as at Aspen- 


dos and at Orange, an arcade or a colonnade protected-. 


this passageway. 


Sa 
eet 


The entrance to, and the exit from, the theatron was 


ordinarily through parodoi (dpodor), side passageways, 
between the theatron and the stage. These parodoi were 
usually closed by gates. Gate-posts still remain at Epi- 
dauros and at Priene (Fig. 878). Occasionally, as at 
Athens and at Segesta, a direct entrance to the epithea- 
tron was possible from a higher level. At Syracuse there 
were separate entrances for each diazoma. In Roman 
theatres the parodoi became vaulted passages beneath 
the theatron, and exit from the theatre was further facili- 
tated by means of vomitoria, or openings into passages 
which honeycombed the substructure of the theatron and 
led, by means of stairways, to the exterior. 

The third factor in the Greek theatre, and the last in 
order of development, was the skene (oxnvy), or stage- 


building, with its robing-rooms and property-rooms, and 
the logeion (Aoyetov), or actors’ platform. In the earliest 


theatres a tent sufficed for robing purposes, and the 
actors, who mingled with the chorus in the orchestra, 
seldom required a raised platform. Their costume suf- 
ficiently distinguished them from the chorus. As occa- 
sion demanded they could elevate themselves above the 
chorus by standing on the steps of the altar platform, or 
upon a temporary stand (Sma, tpamefa). In theatres 
of the classic period the skene was built of wood, stone, 
or marble, and in the luxurious theatres of the late Greek 
and Roman periods, polychromatic marbles, bronze, silver, 
and gold and ivory were employed in the decoration of 
the stage fagades. Throughout the fourth century the 


347 


MONUMENTS 


‘QUIIIG JV 91] VOT], JO Soporvg —‘gse ‘DI 


348 GREEK ARCHITECTURE ‘ — 


skene was located outside of the perimeter of the orches- 
tra circle. In the late Greek plays the part played by 
the chorus diminished and that of the actors increased. 


ORCHESTRA 


pee 


Sw ewe © wwe eS ewe eee — 


o* 
oe =, 
o een 

a 


ew eee ew wee we ye ew ew He 


LOCEION —-~" ” 
- \ see Cah 


_ coor oS 


7 


~ 
~ 


Fig. 379. — Plan of the Theatre at Termessos. 
This change is reflected in Graeco-Roman theatres, such 
as those at Termessos (Fig. 879) and Sagalassos,! where 
the logeion of the stage building encroached somewhat 
upon the full circle of the orchestra. | 
The geometrical rules laid down by Vitruvius? for 


1 Lanckoronski, II, Taf. 10, 26. 
2 Vitruvius, V,7; Choisy, I, 486 ; Doerpfeld, Ath. Mitt., XXII (1897), 458, 


MONUMENTS ; 349 


planning a Greek theatre are based upon theatres of the 
Graeco-Roman period. In theatres of the Roman type 
the stage-building, with its enlarged logeion, encroached 


0" 
48 


a, 
OY 


'@, 


we? * 
Bb A 
XE/. 
a SO 
ie, SO 
Hi . 
| MG NUWRRET 


PTT 


| Ea 


eos 
~—— ee = 


Fia. 380. — Plan of a Theatre according to Vitruvius. 


still more until it occupied one-half of the orchestral circle 
(Fig. 380). 

In plan the skene was, almost without exception, a rec- 
tangle with, or without, a projection in front, or on the 
sides, or in the rear. The central portion of the skene is 
called in a Delian inscription ! 4 uéon xn}; hence, it may, 
for convenience, be called the mesoskenion (wecooKnmov). 


1 B.C. H., XVIII (1894), 163. 


350 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


In length the mesoskenion was usually equal to the dia- 
meter of the orchestra with the surrounding passageway. 
This may be seen in the theatres at Eretria, Delos, and 
Priene. In later Greek theatres, such as those at Termes 
sos and Sagalassos, the skene has no lateral projection, 
but has increased in length to about one and a half orches- 
tral diameters. In the Roman theatre, according to 
Vitruvius,! the length of the skene should be double the 


diameter of the orchestra. Thus the stage-building 


gradually gained in length. The mesoskenion was ordina- 
rily subdivided by cross walls into three rooms, to which 
access from the orchestra was given by three doors. It 
was seldom more complicated. 


In elevation the skene consisted originally of a single: 


story. In the classic period it had two stories, the lower 
of which may be called the hyposkenion (v7rocxjuor), as 
the upper was called the episkenion (émtoxjuov). Thus 
the term hyposkenion sometimes referred to the inner and 
lower rooms of the skene.? In the late Greek, and in the 
Roman, theatre the hyposkenion, or ground floor, lost value 
and presented to the spectator the appearance of a mere 


support to the actors’ platform. It retained usually three | 


or more doorways. The episkenion, however, increased 
in importance, and was decorated with columns and entab- 
latures. At Termessos and at Sagalassos® a single order 


1 Vitruvius, V, 6, 6. 

2 The six rooms of the mesoskenion at Sikyon, as published by Doerp- 
feld and Reisch (p. 117), are believed by the American excavator 
(MeMurtry, in A.J.A., V (1889), 274-275, Pl. 9) to result from a crossing 
of Roman with Greek walls. 

3 Doerpfeld und Reisch, 300. 

4 Pollux, I'V, 132: vd 76 Novetov Kelyevov. 

5 Lanckoronski, II, 98, Taf. 11, 29. 


ie NS 0 44 A ee ie . ‘ ae gd 
a eT ek ee a ee Re Ee te ye 


Ae = 


< ee fae ig es 
oe ee” lay ae ee 


aa 


MONUMENTS Beal 


Fig. 381. — Skene of the Theatre at Aspendos. 


Shc GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


sufficed, but at Aspendos (Fig. 381) two orders occur, 


and in the theatre of M. Scaurus at Rome,! three orders - 


were required to decorate the scenae frons. Vitruvius? 
demanded that the height of the skene should equal the 
height of the roof of the portico at the summit of the 
theatron. Thus the skene gradually gained also in 
height. 

A further development of the skene consisted in the 
projection of wings on one or more sides. ‘The front wing 
was named the proskenion (mpooxnuov), the lateral wings 
paraskenia (7rapacknua), and the rear wing we may call 
the opisthoskenion (dé7tcGocKknuov); of these the proske- 
nion was the most important. In the classic period it 
consisted of a narrow projection, in length equal to the 
diameter of the orchestra, in breadth varying from two to 
three metres, and in height from two and a half to four 
metres. Originally the entire proskenion was made of 
wood; later its supports were made of stone, or marble, 
decorated so as to resemble a colonnade, the intercolumni- 
ations of which were filled with pinakes (srivaxes), or 
movable wooden panels. ‘The theatres at Priene and at 
Oropos furnish the best examples of such proskenia and 
show how the pinakes were held in place. Such pro- 
skenia were so high and so narrow as to suggest their use 
as backgrounds for plays given in the orchestra.* This, 
however, was not their only purpose. The top of the 
proskenion seems to have been as important as its fagade. 
It was reached by doors from the mesoskenion, by open 
steps or by secret passages from the orchestra, by ramps 
from the parodoi, and in various ways from the para- 


MPliny, Noll. XX RV I9 24, 11; 3 See Fig. 378. 
2 Vitruvius, V, 6, 4. * Doerpfeld und Reisch, 341-365. 


MONUMENTS 353 


skenia.! It was known also as the logeion (Aoyetov),? or 
speaker’s platform. In late Greek and in Roman theatres 
the proskenion or logeion was deepened, so as to accommo- 
date both chorus and actors, and lowered so as to allow a 
better view to the occupants of the front seats. From 
the mesoskenion three doors opened upon the logeion: a 
central or royal door (@vpa Bacideos) for the principal 


—! 


Fic. 382. — Skene of the Theatre at Eretria. 


actor, on either side of which were the doors of the guests 
or strangers (Ovpa trav Edvov). 

The lateral extensions of the mesoskenion were known 
as paraskenia. At Eretria (Fig. 382), and elsewhere, on 
either side of the mesoskenion were projecting wings, from 
the upper story of which doors probably led to the logeion. 
In the theatre at Epidauros the paraskenia did not 
project beyond the front wall of the mesoskenion, but 
lateral access was given to the logeion by means of ramps. 
The two ramps may have served for such actors as were 
supposed to be arriving from the country or from the city. 
At Priene® such access was secured by continuing the 
logeion partially around the sides of the mesoskenion. 


1 Puchstein, 46 ff. 
2Delos Inscription of 279 z.c., in B.C.H., XVIII (1894), 162 ff. ; 
Vitruvius, V, 7, 2. 8 Priene, Fig. 229. 
2A 


354 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


These lateral extensions of the logeion we may name 
paralogeia (awapadoyeia), a typical example of which is 
found at Magnesia (Fig. 383). At Termessos a process — 
of simplification is in evidence. Here the paraskenia are 
absorbed by the mesoskenion so as to form one long cor- 
ridor, and the paralogeia, barely indicated by bounding 
walls, supply the outermost entrances. At Aspendos all 


Fic, 383. — Skene of the Theatre at Magnesia. 


reminiscences of paralogeia except the a have 
disappeared. 

For the rear of the skene there was no demand for the 
creation of a fixed type. It was left undecorated at Oro- 
pos and Priene, whereas the large theatre at Pompeii and 
that at Aspendos were icone with pilasters, cornices, | 
and other architectural ornament. At Magnesia we find 
an opisthoskenion with three entrances; at Delos! the 
logeion was continued around the building, forming 
what may be called a perilogeion (wepiAoyetov). At Sik- 
yon in this position was a portico, and at Megalopolis an 
assembly-hall known as the Thersilion. For the conven- 
ience of the populace as well as of the theatrical company 
Vitruvius? advised the erection of porticoes behind the 
skene. 


1 Doerpfeld und Reisch, Figs. 58-59. 2 Vitruvius, V, 9, 1. 


Ad 


| , L yf « 
"I a : ; Bh CPW, 

j Bea nie M7; MEA if . 

M Lp I YY yy THE UPPER CITADEL 


full | 


FA ne TENNIS MSM MA yy, 
t ae Ih h aii FO at IS i yh OL ee Wis 
Ml ve HillAy pati ¢ oe ay 


sts. 


WY hs 
MWY TIRYNS. 
ei DRAWN BY ; 
ae Dr. W. DORPFELD, 


‘ ZZ 


€ zy ’ Ls Ti Ae aff 

RSS i mE L. Waypitn, 
REL LMM pai 
QIK 2 s 


ex 
SB KY Or <a 


Os 


YYZ 
ei LL \ 
a 


A 
AS 


awe © ani 
= ait. 


\\\ 
N 


: ba) \ 


N 4% 
‘> 


Ky iA , iy 
Weta e WGA. es ‘\| > i : \ 
3 ‘Lc if = AN : 
| iM Wi 


Wi; 
Sh 


wy i ae ET acligs 
ah 2 : Vo 20 les eis i Masih 
YY pe AS ath 


i \ i 
an i 
ail\\ Hy 
\ 


= Ze 
= N 
—o. f 


AN 
apoyo 
Wirean mica A, 


ii GILT. Dear 
Ee 


PAG Ye AS 
a: Mh 9, ek — TO i WA 
My dy ' % Ey ¥: : eS: .! ee y SN aan 3 al\ 4 \\ ’ wat \\ \\\ \ H 


'y 


bh 


——< 


| ni" 


iN 


I 
f ‘ } Ais \ . 
5 Mee Ma f on Wy, Aoonih Fy ali i \ \ ANY 


I Heim me! \ 
of Ae } : } 
yl dg ue Dis : \ \ \\ B Vaulted chambers. 
na A Wy Hy, e Se fs NAN wv" C Gallery. 
& Jy i \ iN \Y rn D Corridor with staircase. 
i ‘ mut A E Portico. 
: Y : : MI \ '\' \j \ aM F Large fore-court. 
SY, pj ; Aah SAA helt 2 G S.W. corner of the palace. 


f H Great Propyleum, 
i SS 1 Portico. 
i ' a L Large courtyard. 
rH Heth 
je iy 


ut 


Fig. 384. — Plan of the Palace at Tiryns. 


K The little Propyleum. 


M Megaron of the Men. 

N Little courtyard. 

O Megaron of the Women. 
P Vaulted chambers. 

Q Cistern. 

R Gallery in the east wall. 
S Shafts sunk in 1876. 

T Side ascent. 

U Cellar-like rooms. 

V Cistern. 


W Tower on the north-west side. Wall on t 


X Little staircase, 
Y Entrancetothemiddlecitadel, 
Z Middle Court, or rear Court, 
T’ Tower on the north-east side. 
A Ramp of the main ascent, 
©. Gate of the citadel. 
A .Altar in the Men's courtyard. 
= Place where the terra-cottas 

were found. 
> Door to the pier R. 

, the semicircular 

projection. 


The numbers indicate the altitude above the level of the sea. 


itp - 


MONUMENTS ooo 


The Odeion (@édetov), or music hall, was designed for 
musical contests and rehearsals of plays. This demand 
called for a building like the Greek theatre, but smaller 
and covered with a roof (@datpov tmwpddiov). Such was, 
in fact, the type of building represented by the Odeion 
of Herodes Atticus at Athens,! and other Odeia of the 
Roman period.? It is natural to assume that a similar 
type prevailed in the earlier periods. 

8. BurLpINGs FoR Domestic Usg. — Greek houses,? 
whether designed for kings or private persons, were essen- 
tially Oriental in character. ‘They were provided, as in 
Egypt and Assyria, with open courts and separate apart- 
ments for men and women. These features, which appear 
more or less distinctly throughout the entire history of 
the Greek house, indicate already a developed or complex 
type. . 

The courtyard (avA7) in the country house preceded 
the domestic apartments, and was used for stabling and 
other such purposes. In the town house it was situated 
within the walls of the house itself, and furnished a breath- 
ing place and source of air and light and warmth for the 
surrounding apartments. In the Mycenaean palace at 
Tiryns (Fig. 384), and in private houses of the late Greek 
period, a succession of courts are found, but in most Greek 
houses of the classic period a single court sufficed. These 
courts were frequently surrounded with porticoes, and may 
well be classified by the variations of this character. It 
was by no means necessary that a Greek courtyard should 


1 Tuckermann’s plan in Baumeister, III, Figs. 1823-1824. 
_ 2 Stieglitz, II, 222-240. . 
8 Becker-Goll, II, 105; W. Lange, 7-48 ; Daremberg et Saglio, s.v. 
Domus. ; 


356 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


be surrounded by colonnaded walks. There were no 
such colonnades in the fifth-century house at Dystos in 
Euboia! and few in the houses excavated at Priene.? 
A similar absence of columns usually. characterized the 
atrium of the Roman house. The peristyle court, on the 
other hand, existed in various forms from the earliest 
days. ‘The pre-Hellenic palace at Phaistos in Crete?® 
had colonnades upon two sides of its great court; at 
Tiryns the court of the men had colonnades on three 
sides, which, with the porch of the megaron on the fourth 
side, made the court almost completely peristylar. Com- 
plete peristyle courts (rerpaoroor) existed in private houses 
in Egypt as early as the Twelfth Dynasty, as may be 
seen in the remains at Kahun.* In Greek lands they 
were not common until the Hellenistic and Graeco-Roman 
periods, when we find them represented at Delos,® Priene,® 
Thera,’ and in Italy at Pompeii. Such peristyles may be 
distinguished from each other as tetrastyle, hexastyle, and 
so on, according to the number of columns involved. But 
another distinction preserved by Vitruvius ® is of greater 
interest. He distinguishes between peristyle courts with 
uniform porticoes and those known as Rhodian (arepiorvAov 
“Podtaxév), in which the porch with the southern exposure 
was composed of loftier columns. The former type is 
represented in the houses at Delos and Pompeii, the lat- 
ter at Priene. The court with uniform porticoes reflects 
the love of regularity which characterized Hellenistic 

1 Wiegand, Ath. Mitt., XXIV (1899), 458. 2: Priene, 290. 

3 Pernier, Mon. Ant., XIV (1904), Tav. 27. 

4 Petrie, Kahun, 7, Pl. 14. 

6 B.O.H., VII (1884), 473; XIX (1895), 460; XXIX (1905), 40. 


6 Priene, 297. 
7 Hiller von Gaertringen, ITI, 140. 8 Vitruvius, VI, 7, 3. 


MONUMENTS ook 


architecture in general, whereas the so-called Rhodian type 
was more like that of a Mycenaean palace in which the 
portico of the megaron dominated the rest. A house at 
Priene,! known as No. XXXIII, illustrates in a striking 
manner how naturally this type of court was evolved. 
Peristyle courts may also be distinguished as_ single 
storied and two storied. The latter variety seems not 
to have been confined to important houses, like the 
palace of Hyrkanos in Syria,? but was found in small 
houses like the one on the banks of the Inopos at Delos.? 

The approaches to the court varied according to cir- 
cumstances. Palaces were reached through imposing 
propylaia.* In ordinary town houses projecting porches 
(mpoOupa), such as those of the houses at Tanagra,> were 
usually dispensed with as hindrances in the narrow 
streets. The entrance was protected by gratings (po- 
gpayuata) and by a door which led to the court. Fre- 
quently there was a vestibule, and, when practicable, a 
porters room. The rooms about the court, apart from 
those of the principal side, appear to have served various 
purposes. Some were undoubtedly store-rooms, others 
may be recognized as kitchens, dining halls, or as sleeping 
rooms. The principal apartment was known specifically 
as the oikos, or house (oixos, dduos, Sua). It contained 
the family hearth, and was situated at the north end of 
the court, so as to receive the warmth of the winter sun.® 
In its earliest form the oikos was a mere enclosure to 


1 Priene, 297-300. 

2 De Vogiié, Le Temple de Jerusalem, 39; Lange, 149, Taf. 6. 

3 B.C.H., VIII (1884), 483. 

4 Mackenzie, in B.S.A., XI (1904-1905), 181-228. 

5 Lange, 129, note 1. 6 Xenophon, Oecon., 1X; Memorab., II, 8. 


858 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


which was added a prodomos (mpédopuos), or anteroom. 
The inner room developed internally through the addi- 
tion of supports for its roof. The larger megaron at 
Tiryns had four columnar supports for its roof. When 
six or more columns were used to support the ceiling, it 
was called a Corinthian house (otkos Kopév@tos) ; when 
superposed colonnades were employed and the central 
space lighted, as in a basilica, by clerestory windows, it — 
was known as an Egyptian house (oixos Adytzrwos) ; 
when a similar room was projected northward, having a 
central doorway with folding doors, and low, lateral win- 
dows allowing vistas into the garden, it was called 
Kyzikene (oixos Ku&ixnves).1 The prodomos varied in 
disposition. It was treated as a single space, or sub- 
divided by a wall, or columns, into an outer porch and 
inner vestibule. The porch might be without columns, or 
show one column between antae, as in house No. XXXII 
at. Priene,? or two columns, as was commonly the case. 
Of more significance than the modification of the princi- 
pal apartment is its relation to the rest of the house. 
Noack has pointed out the isolation of the megaron as a 
distinguishing feature of Mycenaean palaces; whereas, in 
Cretan palaces, at least in those at Knossos and at Phaistos, 
the megara are more closely connected with the general 
series of apartments. Thus the Mycenaean palaces re- 
flect warlike and aristocratic, those of Crete peaceful and 
democratic, conditions. Both types seem to have found 
their way into the private houses of ordinary citizens in 
later days. ‘The houses. excavated at Priene resemble 
those of the Mycenaean type, since the oikos, like the 
‘megara, was given an imposing prostas (mpootas) or 


1 Vitruvius, VI, 3, 10. 2 Priene, 325. 8 Noack, 7. 


MONUMENTS 359 


prodomos. The plan of house No. XXIV at Priene 
(Fig. 385) will show the significance still attached to 
this feature by an ordinary citizen in the second century 
B.C. Houses of this type developed around this central 
feature as a nucleus by the addition of rooms on one 
side only, or on both sides —in 
the latter case known to Vitruvius 
as thalamoi (@aXayor) and amphi- 
thalamoi (auqdiOdrapor). A higher 
degree of complexity arose when 
the apartments for the men (avdpar, 
avopwvitis) were separated from 
those of the women (yuvatcovitis. ) 
At Priene this was sometimes 
accomplished by juxtaposed apart- 
ments, as in house No. XXVI,! 
and sometimes by an upper story 
(vrep@ov), as in house No. XXXV.? 
Three-storied houses (tpioteyou 
oixot), such as those at Alexandria? 
and one recently excavated at Pom- 
peli, were uncommon. Sleeping rooms were sometimes, as 
at ‘Tiryns, close to the principal apartment; elsewhere, 
as at Arne?* (Fig. 886), they were relegated to the rear. 
The ruins in the latter town exhibit in a striking 
manner the use of corridors (Aavpat, poyes) by means of 
which access could be had to widely separated por- 
tions of the building and greater privacy secured. Simi- 


PROSTAS 


Fic. 385. — House No. 
XXIV at Priene. 


1 Priene, 295, Fig. 314. 2 Thid., 295, Fig. 313. 

3 Theophanes, Chronographia, p. 150, ed. Classen. 

4 A. de Ridder, in B.C. H., XVIII (1894), 271-3810, Pls. 10-11; Noack, 
in Ath. Mitt., XIX (1894), 405-485. 


360 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


lar narrow, double passages in Egyptian houses at Kahun 
led to the men’s and women’s quarters. ‘The prevalence 
of long corridors at Priene also is noteworthy. Passages 


Fig. 386. — The Palace at Arne. 


which connected two courts were known as §f §g x 
mesauloi (wéoavror).} 

A second type of Greek house is well illus- 
trated by the houses at Delos built after 
the Athenian occupation in the second cen- 
tury and before its destruction in 86 B.c. In 
these houses the oikos is not isolated, nor is 
it provided with an independent prostas. 
It is merely a large room with doorway and 
windows towards the court. ‘The peristyle 
court gives character to the house; hence 
these houses may be designated as of the peristyle type. 
In the house on the street leading to the theatre (Fig. 387) 
the columns opposite the oikos were of greater diameter 
than the rest, but were not located with reference to its 
walls or doorway. The oikos presents its broadest face to 
the court and in this respect differs from that of the houses 
with a prostas. The peristyle type seems to have been 


UHé«CL+p 
YG 


YesesGY 
WIZ: 


1 Vitruvius, VI, 7, 5. 


— 
Po 


MONUMENTS SOL 


represented at Athens in the fourth century by the house 
of Kallas, in which Protagoras walked with his disciples 
in one portico (apoor@ov), while Hippias! sat enthroned 
in the opposite (é€v 7T@ Katavtexpv TpocTt@@m). Both types 
of houses seem to have left their imprint on the Italic and 
Roman house. At Pompeii? the 
two types were frequently united 
in the same building (Fig. 388). 

9. NAVAL ARCHITECTURE. — 
In this section we consider first 
the construction, forms, and decor- 
ation of Greek ships, then harbors, 
ship sheds, and arsenals. 

The Greek ship (vats) was con- 
structed for service in an inland 
sea. It was, therefore, a small 
open boat, which could without 
difficulty be drawn up on a beach. 
Being constructed, for the sake of 
lightness, of such woods as pine, 
spruce, larch, and cypress, its solid- 
ity depended upon its construc- 
tion. The shallow keel (zpezmis) 
was stiffened not only by an external or false keel (yvé 
Avopa) of beech or oak, but also by a second, internal keel 
(devTepa tpomis). ‘The walls (rotyor) of the vessel con- 
sisted of planking attached to a series of ribs (éyxo/da). 
These walls were strengthened on the exterior by hori- 
zontal waling pieces (fwoTfpes) and sometimes on the 
interior by a second planking. Further rigidity was 


Fig. 387.—House on the 
street tothe theatre, Delos. 


1 Plato, Protagoras, §17; Krause, 511-512; Gardner and Jevons, 
38-39. 2 Mau, 239-360. 


«Ceti Dar "> ' a a hw, Fa a eee crea Fe = SF eel, an ee oe ee ~~ «~s oP ae eS 


“rod uro, ‘11990 A 9q} Jo osnog aut JO y1N09 9[AYSIIOg — 9g ‘DIT! 


GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


362 


MONUMENTS 368 


° secured by the fixed seats (€vya) for the oarsmen and, in 

the larger vessels, by the system of longitudinal and cross 
beams required for decking and other purposes. Even 
| this did not suffice, and, in some representations of Greek 
as well as of Egyptian vessels,! we see ropes (i7rofopata) 


Fig. 389. — Warship from a Greek vase in the British Museum. 


bound around the prow and stern in order to give addi- 
tional strength to the general fabric.?° 

The forms of Greek vessels varied according to special 
requirements. ‘The trading vessel was wide, capacious, 


? 


- 1 Baumeister, III, Figs. 1656, 1671, 1675. 
2 Vessels were also strengthened by ropes extended horizontally. Cf. 
Vitruvius, X, 15,6: funes --- religati --- a puppi ad proram. 


a 


364 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


and slow. Its high bow and stern, with their platforms, 
and its single mast with square sails are features which 
it had in common with Egyptian vessels. The war 
vessel, long, narrow, and swift, depending for its speed 
upon oars rather than sails, owes more to Phoenician pro- 
totypes.! This type was adopted at an early date by the 
Greeks, and had a marked development. As the Greek 
potter learned to mould his vases into animal or human 
forms, so the Greek naval architect played with the forms 
of vessels. Frequently, if we may judge from the repre- 
sentations on vases, the ship resembled a fish? (¢yOvmpe@pos) 
(Fig. 389); sometimes it was fashioned as a goose,’ or a 
swan ;4 occasionally the bow presents the form of a boar’s 
head® (édmp@pos), or the head of a horse.® 

On either side of the bow were large eyes (of@arpo/), 
possibly used as hawse-holes, and projections, known as 
ears (€7rwTides ), for holding the anchor. The name of the 
vessel was sometimes inscribed on the bow.’ The bow 
(cTeipa) was provided with a metal-cased ram (é€uforor), 
at about the water level, and sometimes with a second, 
smaller one (mpoeuSodov) set somewhat higher. Above 
this the bow ended in a curved ornament called the akro- 
stolion (axpooro\ov). The stern terminated in a long 
curved ornament carved and painted to resemble the tail, 
or the neck and head of a bird or fish.8 This ornament, 
known to Homer’ as the afdac7Top, is found also on Roman 
and later vessels. The outer walls of Greek vessels, being 
covered with tar, were almost entirely black, relieved occa- 


1 Layard, Pl. 71. 4 Tbid., Figs. 591-593. 

2 Baumeister, III, Fig. 1661. 5 Smith, s.v. Navis, 220. 

3 Guhl und Koner, Fig. 588. 6 J.H.S., XXVIII (1908), 327. 
7 Burl. Mag., X1V (1908), 71. 

8 Furtwangler und Reichhold, I, Taf. 13. 9 Tiiad, AVS it 


MONUMENTS 365 


sionally by patches of color on the bows. But late Greek 
and Roman ships were sometimes decorated, especially at 
the stern, with elaborate figure paintings.! 

As the war vessel was propelled chiefly by oarsmen, it 
is natural that the rowing system should be made the 
principal object of development. At first the length of 
the vessel was increased so as to admit of a greater num- 
ber of rowing benches. But a limit appears to have been 
reached in the pentekontoros (qwevtnxovtopos), which had 
fifty oarsmen seated on twenty-five benches. When it 
was no longer practicable to increase the length of the 
boat, the number of oars was increased by their arrange- 
ment in superposed banks (ototyor).2 Representations of 
Phoenician,®? Greek,* and Roman® vessels seem to prove 
that vessels with two, three, and even four such banks of 
oars were thus constructed. The terms bireme (é:7pns), 
trireme (tpinpns), etc. are ordinarily taken to designate 
vessels with superposed banks of oars. The Athenian 
navy of the classic period consisted chiefly of triremes. 
Alexander the Great ® is said to have built vessels with 
ten banks of oars; Demetrios Poliorketes,’ vessels with 
fifteen and sixteen banks; Ptolemy Philadelphos (285- 
247 B.C.), floating palaces with twenty and thirty banks, 
while the extreme limit was reached in the so-called forty- 
banked vessel (teccapaxovtnpys) of Ptolemy Philopator 
(222-204 B.c.).2 The practical difficulties involved in 
supposing superposed banks of oars for the higher rated 

1 Torr, 35-36. 

2 Scholiast, on Aelian, quoted by Graser, De veterum re navali, § 4: 
Kata Tods.orlyous Tos KaTa TO UWos em’ AdAAOLS. 

3 Layard, Pl. 71. Se eliy. VL; 67,216, 

4 Torr, Pls. 4, 5. 7 Plutarch, Demetrios, 51. 

5 Baumeister, III, Figs. 1678, 1685. 8 Athen., V, 37. 


366 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


vessels are so great that modern writers have suggested a 
single line of oars arranged in groups of two, three, and so 
on, like the Venetian galea a zenzile,! or with oars manned 
by teams of two, three, four or more oarsmen, like the 
Venetian galea a scaloccio.2. The marble prow which bears 
the Nike of Samothrace,? now in the Louvre, and a relief 
recently found at Lindos,* show projecting galleries 
(mapeEepeciat), resembling encased outriggers, to protect 
the oarsmen. Above this on some vessels was a bul- 
warked passage (7apodos). A similar disposition is found 
on mediaeval galleys. Now, if it be assumed that the 
prow in the Louvre represents a high-rated vessel, such 
as was used by Demetrios Poliorketes, the traditional 
theory of many superposed banks of oars receives a serious 
blow. | 

Greek harbors (Acwéves) may be classed in general as 
natural and artificial. The coast line of Greece furnished 
projecting ledges and retreating bays in abundance, which 


without artificial modification afforded shelter and safety 


to most classes of vessels. Sometimes it was necessary to 
build a breakwater or mole (yma, ynd7) to protect vessels 


at anchor from the force of wind and waves. But the im- 


portant cities, subject to attack from foreign vessels, were 
obliged to establish closed harbors (Auweéves KAevoTol ) with 
narrow entrances protected by chains, with convenient 
quays (€pvpata), ship sheds (ve@cotxor), and arsenals pro- 
tected by fortification walls with towers and lighthouses. 
In the construction of the breakwaters the ingenuity of 


1L. Fincati, Le triremi, 2d ed., Rome, 1881; Tarn, J.H.S8., XXV 
(1905), 188 ; Cook and Richardson, Class. Rev., XIX (10905), 375. 

2 Furttenbach, Taf. 7. 3 Baumeister, Il, Fig. 1698. 

4 A.J.A., XII (1908), 91. ' 


4 


MONUMENTS | 367 


the Greeks displayed itself at an early date. By the 
seventh century B.c. the Corinthians built submarine 
walls in which blocks of stone were so united by a gravel 
cement as to be practically monolithic.!. At a later but 
pre-Roman period, the submarine walls at Mytilene? con- 
sisted of concrete made of lime slacked in oil and then 
mixed with sand and broken stone. No attempt was made 
to establish any regular form for these closed harbors. 
The Lechaion® harbor at Corinth was exceedingly ir- 
regular; that at Larymna‘* was semicircular; and that at 
Rhodes,® rectangular. 

The lighthouse (¢apos) added much to the convenience 
of sailors. The most famous was the Pharos at Alexandria, 
built of white marble, in many stories, and diminishing in 
successive stages towards the top, where torches or fires 
were kept burning at night. Such lighthouses appear to 
have been located near harbor entrances. The quays 
were built, as the breakwaters, of finer upon coarser 
masonry. At Larymna the walls are effectively buttressed 
so as to resist the force of the waves. The ship sheds, of 
which there are many remains, consisted of stone tracks 
upon which the boats were hauled, probably by windlasses, 
from the water into boathouses on the shore. ‘These 
seldom exceeded one hundred and fifty feet in length and 
fifteen in width, and consisted of a single story. Dry- 
docks where transports might be cleaned and repaired 
were infrequent. But it may be noticed that at Larymna 
the inner harbor was closed by two flood-gates, by means 
of which it could be converted into a dry-dock; at Se- 


1 Georgiades, 4. 3 Georgiades, Pl. 1. 
2 Koldewey, 6. 4 Ibid., Pl..5. 
5 Merckel, 341. 


368 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


leukeia,! the port of Antioch, the supply of water to the 
inner harbor was under control by means of a tunnel. 
Dockyards (vavrnya) were also necessary for ship-building, 
and elaborate preparations were made for launching such 
large vessels as those belonging to Ptolemy Philadelphos 
and Ptolemy Philopator.2 Arsenals (o«evo0jxar), where 
the oars, sails, and tackle were stored, were occasionally 
buildings of some architectural interest. The Arsenal at 
the Peiraieus,? built by Philon (347-330 B.c.) of Eleusis 
and EKuthydomos of Miletos, was the most famous build- 
ing of its class. It resembled a basilica, the side aisles of 
which contained superposed stories, or stacks, for storage. 

The interests of foreign commerce made still further 
demands upon the architect. Storehouses, examples of 
which have been found at Delos,t and _ sanctuaries 
for the use of sailors were built near the harbor. Col- 
onnades with shops attached were also common in seaports. 
At the Peiraieus® there were five such colonnades, which 
must have added considerably to the beauty of the harbor. 

10. SEPULCHRAL ARCHITECTURE. — When his active 
life neared its end, the Greek desired an artist to make 
for him a suitable resting-place. Whether he was to be 
buried, as were the heroes of old, or cremated, as was 
sometimes the custom, he wished for some memorial to 
mark the location of his body or his ashes. This might take 
the form of a sculptured or painted stele (o77Am), and of 
this class of monuments there are many beautiful remains; ® 


1 Merckel, 355-358. 2 Athen., V. 

8 Choisy, Mtudes, 1-42; Doerpfeld, Ath. Mitt., VIII (1883), 147-164. 

4 Jardé, in B.C.H., X XIX (1905), 21-40. 5 Frazer, Paus., II, 24. 

6 Conze, Die attischen Grabreliefs ; P. Gardner, Sculptured Tombs of 
Hellas ; Eph. Arch., 1908, Pls, 1-4. 


MONUMENTS 369 


or of a statue, representing such subjects as a lion, a bull, 
a dog, a siren, a satyr, the deceased himself or the official 
chair he occupied; or of a box or sarcophagus, of which 
there were many interesting varieties.!_ Although such 
monuments belong to the field of sculpture, we frequently 
find in them a suggestion that the departed had entered 
into his eternal home. ‘The notion of the tomb as a house 
was very familiar to the ancient world, especially to the 
Egyptians,? Phoenicians,? Persians,* Phrygians,®> Lycians,® 
and Etruscans.’ It was accepted by the Greeks, who 
frequently gave an architectural character to their tombs. 
Such monuments as belong properly to our survey may 
be thrown into two general classes: (1) those which are 
partially architectural, and (2) those which are entirely 
architectural in character. ‘To the first class belong 
tombs which exhibit a single architectural feature, such 
as a raised foundation, a column, gable or fagade. To 
the second class may be assigned tombs which represent 
an entire building, such as a tower, house, or temple. 

The tumulus or mound (yoya) of earth, without archi- 
tectural character, served in the Troad to commemorate 
Homeric heroes, and at Marathon to cover the remains 
of the Athenians who fell in battle. It was given more 
enduring form by a wall at the base (xpn7ris, Opiyxes), as 
in the tumulus of Phokos in Aegina,’ or its surface was 
covered with stucco, as in the conical tombs discovered 
in Peiraieus street at Athens,? or with stone, as in the 


1 Baumeister, ILI, s.v. Sarcophagus. 5 Tbid., V, 81-145. 
2 Perrot et Chipiez, I, 129-322. 6 Tbid., V, 861-384. 
3 Ibid., III, 187-240. 7 Martha, 176-220. 
4 Tbid., V, 589-638. ° Paus:, 17, 20, 9. 


*Brueckner, in Jhb., VI (1891), 198. 
2B 


370 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


tomb of Tantalos near Smyrna. This type of sepulchral 
monument culminated in gigantic structures such as the 
Mausoleia of Augustus and of Hadrian at Rome. The 
pyramid was occasionally substituted for the tumulus, 
as at Kenchreai? between Argos and Tegea. 

Columns (x/oves), as sepulchral monuments, occur either . 
alone or as pedestals bearing some sculptured memorial. 
Their shafts and capitals show considerable variety in 
style. Pilasters supporting a gable also frequently 
occur as a framework in sculptured Athenian stelae. 
Four pillars supporting a roof, forming a baldachino or 
tabernacle, is said by Pausanias® to have been the normal 
type of tomb at Sikyon, and his statement is confirmed by — 
Sikyonian coins.® Rock-cut tombs sometimes displayed 
an entire building, as in the tombs at Kyrene. 

More completely architectural were the various types of 
chamber and house tombs. Even the tumuli sometimes 
covered a hidden room, which served as the home of the 
departed. ‘These chamber tombs,’ in plan either circular, 
or elliptical,’ or rectangular, reflected the type of houses 
in use amongst the living. During the Mycenaean 
period they often resembled Phoenician tombs, in being 
preceded by a narrow passage (dpduos). Occasionally, as 
in the Tholos of Atreus at Mycenae, and in one of the 
tombs at Knossos, the entrance received elaborate archi- 
tectural decoration, and led through a contracted passage 
(atow.ov) to the sepulchral chamber. In general they 


1 Perrot et Chipiez, V, 48, 49. 2 Reber, 186. 8 P. Gardner, 110. 

4 Borrmann, Jhb., III (1888), 269-285. 6 Frazer, Paus., II, 46. 

5 Paus.; I; 7, 2: 7 Gropengiesser, 35. 

8 Halbherr, A.J.A., V (1901), 291; Pfuhl, Ath. Mitt., XXVIII (1903), 
245. 


MONUMENTS old 


were family tombs, having sometimes a single chamber, 
sometimes several connecting rooms. ‘The ceilings, as in 
Phrygian and Etruscan tombs, received special attention. 
In the rotundas (@0A01) we find pointed domes constructed 
in converging horizontal courses, giving to the interior of 
the building the shape of a beehive.! The exterior of the 


Fic. 390. — Interior of Tomb at Tamossos. 


sepulchral chamber was covered with earth, and even the 
entrance passage at times blocked up. This prevented 
the vaults from falling in and protected the tomb from 
intrusion. The tombs with rectangular chambers had 
horizontal, or peaked, ceilings, and, if rock cut, reflected 


1 Tgountas-Manatt, 115-158. 


Sipe GREEK ARCHITECTURE 


the usual methods of roof construction. In the classic and 
later period in Athens sumptuary laws! prevented the con- 
struction of expensive tombs; hence we look elsewhere for 
examples. An interesting example from the classic period 
is found at Tamossos in Cyprus (Fig. 5390). In the Hellen- 
istic period chamber tombs, usually rock cut and fashioned 
under Greek influence, are found in Asia Minor, Africa, 
Italy, and elsewhere. At Pydna in Macedonia,? a tumulus 
covers a fully constructed house. A vaulted dromos leads 
to this subterranean house, which consisted, like the mega- 
ron at Tiryns, of a large room preceded by two vestibules. 
All the rooms were covered with stone barrel vaults. The 
doorway to the sepulchral chamber was surmounted by a 
Doric frieze and gable (Fig. 391). 

In some localities house tombs were constructed above 
the soil. At Labranda® there is a free-standing tomb, 
which follows the type of a Greek house in having a 
courtyard, vestibule, and principal chamber, above which, 
beneath the roof, is a second story. In Lycia,* where 
art was moulded in great measure under Greek influence, 
there are many tombs which imitate types of half-timbered 
houses. Some have horizontal, others arched roofs. — 

Tombs resembling temples form a final stage in this ~ 
development. To this class belongs the so-called Nereid 
Monument of Xanthos,® which reproduces the form of an 
Ionic peristyle temple set upon a high plinth. The tem- 
ple form was sometimes repeated also in sarcophagi, a fine 
example of which is the Sarcophagus of the Mourners 


1 Becker-Goll, IIT, 145. 2 Heuzey, Mont Olympe, Pl. 2. 

3 Reinach-Lebas, Arch. As. Min., I, Pl. 9. j 

4 Perrot et Chipiez, V, 361-384 ; Benndorf und Niemann, Taf. 19, 26, 
Bi, 43, 5 Overbeck, II, 191. 


MONUMENTS Sie 


Fic. 391. — Doorway of a Tomb at Pydna. 


found at Sidon.! A more complicated type was produced 
by superposing a pyramidal roof upon the Greek temple 
ES type. Such was the Lion Tomb at Knidos? and the still 


1 Hamdy Bey-Reinach, 238-271, Pls. 4-11 ; Collignon, II, Figs, 212, 213. 
2 Newton, I, Pl. 63. ; 


LELEF bn ES Pe LINEA ABT 


Fia. 392. — Restoration of Mausoleion at Halikarnassos. 
374 


- 


ss MONUMENTS ESS 


~ more imposing Mausoleion at Halikarnassos ! (Fig. 392). 


_ The latter building, famous for its sculptured decoration, 
2 was finely conceived and proportioned, and properly reck- 
i oned as one of the Seven Wonders of the World. 


a 
“9 
Mi 


1 Newton, I, Pl. 18: Br. Mus. Cat. of Gk. Sc., I, 76-77; Dinsmoor, 
cA J. ay XII Se fee 1-29, 141-171. 


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 


1. PERIODICALS - 


Abh. Berl. Akad. = Abhandlungen der Kéniglichen Akademie der 
Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Berlin, 1815- 

A.J.A. = The American Journal of Archaeology. The Journal of the 
Archaeological Institute of America. Baltimore, Princeton, New York, 
1885- 

Ant. Denk. = Antike Denkmdler. Herausgegeben vom Kaiserlich 
Deutschen Archaeologischen Institut. 2 vols. published. Berlin, 
1891- 

Arch. Anz. = Archaeologischer Anzeiger. Beiblatt zum Jahrbuch des 
Archaeologischen Instituts. Berlin, 1889- , 

Arch. Rec. = The Architectural Record. New York, 1891- 

A.S.A.= Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at 
Athens. 1885- 

Ath. Mitt. = Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaeologischen Instituts in 
Athen. Athens, 1876- | 

A.Z. = Archaeologische Zeitung. Berlin, 1843-1885. 

B.S.A. = The Annual of the British School at Athens. London, 1895- 

Buri. Mag. = The Burlington Magazine. London, 1903- 

Cl. Rev. = The Classical Review. London, 1887- 

Eph. Arch. = "Eqnpepis apxatoAoyixy. Athens, 1837- 

G.B.A. = Gazette des Beaux Arts. Paris, 1858- 

Harv. Stud. = Harvard Studies in Classical Philology. Cambridge, 
1890- 

Jh. Oesterr. Arch. = Jahreshefte des Oesterreichischen Archaeologischen 
Instituts. Wien, 1898— 

Jhb. = Jahrbuch des Kaiserlich Deutschen Archaeologischen Instituts. 
Berlin, 1887- ‘ 

Jhb. Oesterr. Kunsth. Samml. = Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Samm- 
lungen des allerhochsten Kaiserhauses. Wien, 1883- 

377 


378 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 


J.HS. = The Journal of Hellenic Studies. London, 1880- 

J.RI. Br. Architects = Journal of the Royal Institute of British Archi- — 
tects. London, 1893- 

Mon. Ant. = Monumenti Antichi, pubblicati per cura della Reale Acca- 
demia dei Lincei. Milan, 1890- 

Mon. Ined. = Monumenti inediti pubblicati dall’ Instituto di Corre- 
spondenza Archeologica. 10 vols. Rome, 1829-1878. 

Neue Jahrb. = Neue Jahrbiicher fiir das klassische Altertums, Ge- 
schichte, und deutsche Literatur und fiir Pddagogik. Leipzig, 1898- 

Rec. Past = Records of the Past. Washington, 1901- 

Rev. Arch. = Revue archeologique. Paris, 1844— 

Rém. Mitt. = Mitteilungen des Kaiserlich Deutschen Archaeologischen — 
Instituts. Roemische Abtheilung. Rome, 1886- 

Z.f. Bauw. = Zeitschrift fiir Bauwesen. Berlin, 1851- 


2. BOOKS 


Assos, see Bacon, also Clarke. 

AurEs = A. Aurés, Etude des dimensions du grand temple de Pae- 
stum. Paris, 1868. 

Bacon, Assos = Investigations at Assos. Drawings and Photographs 
of the Buildings and Objects discovered during the Excavations of 1881, 
1882, 1883, by Joseph T. Clarke, Francis H. Bacon, Robert Koldewey. 
Edited with explanatory notes by Francis H. Bacon. Pt. I. London, 
Cambridge, Leipzig, 1902. 

BAsILe = G. B. F. Basile, Curvatura delle linee dell’ architettura antica 
con un metodo per lo studio det monumenti. 2d edit. Palermo, 1896. 

BAUMEISTER = A. Baumeister, Denkmidiler des klassischen Altertums, 
zur Erlduterung des Lebens der Griechen und Romer in Religion, Kunst — 
und Sitte. 38 vols. Munich and Leipzig, 1885-1888. 

BECKER-GOLL = Charikles. Bilder altgriechischer Sitte zur genaueren 
Kenntniss des griechischen Privatlebens. Entworfen von Wilhelm 
Adolph Becker. Neu bearbeitet von Bhar Goll.. 8 vols. Berlin, 
1877-1878. 

BrEcHER = F. W. Beecher and H. V. Beecher, Proceedings of the 
Expedition to explore’ the Northern Coast of Africa from Tripoli East- 
ward ; in 1821 and 1822.. London, 1828. 

BENNDORF UND NIEMANN = Otto Benndorf und George Niemann, © 
Reisen in Lykien und Karien. 2 vols. Wien, 1884-1889. 


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 379 


Buiovet = Abel Blouet, Expedition scientifique de Morée ordonnee 
par le gowvernment francais. 3 vols. Paris, 1831-18388. 

BLUMNER = Hugo Bliimner, Technologie und Terminologie der Ge- 
werbe und Kiinste bet Griechen und Romern. 4 vols. Leipzig, 1875- 
1887. 

BoErrTricHER = Karl Boetticher, Die Tektonik der Hellenen. 2 vols. 
in one, and atlas. Berlin, 1874-1881. 

Bonn = Richard Bohn, Die Propylaeen der Akropolis zu Athen. 
Berlin und Stuttgart, 1882. 

Boun-ScHUCHHARDT = Altertiimer von Aegae, unter Mitwirkung von 
Carl Schuchhardt herausgegeben von Richard Bohn. [= 2! Ergiinz- ° 
ungsheft des Jahrb. k. d. Arch. Inst.] Berlin, 1889. 

Boun, Temp. Dion. Perg. = Richard Bohn, Der Tempel des Diony- 
sos zu Pergamon. Aus d. Abh. Konig. Preuss. Akad. Wissensch. zu 
Berlin, 1884. Berlin, 1885. 

BorRMANN = R. Borrmann, in Baumeister, s.v. Polychromie. 

BurckHarpt = Jakob Burckhardt, Griechische Kulturgeschichte. 
dt Aufl. 4 vols. Berlin, 1898-1902. 

BuTierR = Howard ‘Crosby Butler, Architecture, Sculpture, Mosaic, 
and Wall Painting in Northern Central Syria and the Djebel Haurdan. 
New York, 1903. 

Canina, Via Appia = L. Canina, Via Appia dalla Porta Capena a 
Boville. Monumenti. 2 vols. Rome, 1850. 

CaristTre = A. N. Caristie, Monuments antiques a Orie arc de 
triomphe et thédtre, etc. Paris, 1856-1857. 

- Cavvaptias = P. Cavvadias, Fouilles d’Epidaure. Vol. I. Athens, 

1891. 

Cavvapias, Asklep. Temp. = P. Cavvadias, To iepov tod “AckAnmod 
év Emidavpw. Athens, 1900. 

CHOISY = peer Choisy, Histoire de Varchitecture. 2 vols. Paris, 
1899. 

Cuorsy, Etudes = Auguste Choisy, Htudes Misia sur Varchi- 
tecture grecque. Paris, 1884. 

CLARKE, Assos Report I (1882) = Joseph Thacher Clarke, Report on 
the Excavations at Assos, 1881. Papers of Archaeological Institute of 
America. Classical Series, I. Boston, 1882. 

CLARKE, Assos Report II (1898) = Joseph Thacher Clarke, Report 
on the Investigations at Assos, 1882, 1883. Papers of the Archaeological 
Institute of America. Classical Series, 11. New York, 1898. 


380 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 


CocKERELL = C. R. Cockerell, The Temples of Jupiter Panhellenius 
at Aegina and of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae near Phigaleia in Arcadia. 
London, 1860. 

CoLLIGNON = Maxime Collignon, Histoire de la sculpture grecque. 
2 vols. Paris, 1892-1897. 

CoLLIGNon ET PONTREMOLI = Maxime Collignon et Emmanuel 
Pontremoli, Pergame. estauration et description des monuments de 
Vacropole. Paris, 1900. 

Conzre = Alexander Conze, Die aitischen Grabreliefs. 38 vols. Ber- 
lin, 1895-1906. 

ConzE-HAUSER-BENNDORF = Alexander Conze, Alois Hauser, Otto 
Benndorf, Archaeologische Untersuchungen auf Samothrake. 2 vols. 
Vienna, 1875-1880. 

Cook, Spirals = J. H. Cook, Spirals in Nature and Art. London, 
1903. | 

Cros Et Henry = Henry Cros et Charles Henry, L’encaustique et 
les autres proccdes de peinture chez les anciens. Histoire et technique. 
Paris, 1884. 

DAREMBERG ET SAGLIO = Ch. Daremberg et Edm. Saglio, Diction- 
naire des antiquités grecques et romaines. Paris, 1873— 

DerrassE ET Lecuat = Alphonse Defrasse (architecte) et Henri 
Lechat, Epidaure. Paris, 1895. 


DorrPFELD = Wilhelm Doerpfeld, Troja und Ilion. Ergebnisse der 


Ausgrabungen in den vorhistorischen und historischen Schichten von Ilion, 
1870-1894. Athens, 1902. 

DoERPFELD UND Reiscu = Wilhelm Doerpfeld und Emil Reisch, 
Das griechische Theater. Beitrdge zur Geschichte des Dionysos-Theaters 
in Athen und anderer griechischen Theater. Athens, 1896. 

DroysEn = H. Droysen, Heerwesen und Kriegfiihrung der G'riechen. 
In Hermann’s Lehrbuch der griechischen Antiquitdten. II. 2 Abth. 
Freiburg i. B., 1889. 

v. DuHN unD Jacosr = F. von Duhn und L. Jacobi, Der griechische 
Tempel in Pompeji. Heidelberg, 1890. 

Duro = Josef Durm, Die Baukunst der Griechen. 2% Auflage. 
Darmstadt, 1892. 

Durno, Bauk. Etr. Rom. = Josef Durm, Die Baukunst der Etrusker. 
Die Baukunst der Romer. 2'¢ Auflage. Stuttgart, 1905. 

ErpMAnn, Hippodamos von Milet = Erdmann, Hippodamos von Milet 


* 
¢ 

4 

7 
\ 
5 


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 381 


und die symmetrische Stddtebau der Griechen. Philologus, 42 (1883), 
193-227. 

pD’Espouy = H. d’Espouy, Fragments d’architecture antique. Paris, 
n. d. 

Fasricius=Ernst Fabricius, De architectura graeca. Berlin, 1881. 

FALKENER = Edward Falkener, Ephesus and the Temple of Diana. 
London, 1862. 

FENGER = L. Fenger, Dorische Polychromie. Textund Atlas. Ber- 
lin, 1886. 

FERGUSSON = James Fergusson, The Parthenon. An Essay on the 
mode by which light was introduced into Greek and Roman temples. 
London, 1883. 

Foucart = George Foucart, Histoire de Vordre lotiforme. Paris, 
1897. . 

FRAZER, Paus. = J. G. Frazer, Pausanias’s Description of Greece. 
Translated with a commentary. 6 vols. London, 1898. 

FURTTENBACH = Josephus Furttenbach, Architectura Navalis. 
Ulm, 1629. 

FuRTWANGLER = Adolf Furtwiangler, Aegina. Das Heiligtum der 
Aphaia. 2 vols. Miinchen, 1906. 

FuRTWANGLER, Meisterwerke = Adolf Furtwingler, Meisterwerke der 
griechischen Plastik, Leipzig, Berlin, 1893. 

FURTWANGLER UND ReicHHoLp = A. Furtwangler und K. Reich- 
hold, Griechische Vasenmalerei. Munich, 1904. 

GARBETT = E, L. Garbett, Principles oe Design in Architecture. 
London, 1852 (?). 

E. GARDNER = Ernest A. Gardner, Ancient Athens. New York and 
London, 1902. 

P. GARDNER = Percy Gardner, Sculptured Tombs of Hellas. Lon- 
don, 1896. 

GARDNER AND JEVoNs = Percy Gardner and Frank Byron Jevons, 
A Manual of Greek Antiquities. New York, 1895. 

GrorGiADEs = Athan. S. Georgiades, Les ports de la Grece dans 
Vantiquite. Athénes, 1907. 

GoopYEAR = William H. Goodyear, The Grammar of the Lotus. 
London, 1891. 

GROPENGIESSER = Hermann Gropengiesser, Der Graeber von Attika 
der vormykenischen und mykenischen Zeit. Athens, 1907. 


382 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 


GSELL = Stéfane Gsell, Les monuments del’ Algerie. 2 vols. Paris, 
1901. aa 
GUHL UND KonerR = Guhl und Koner, Leben der Griechen und Ro- 
mer. Sechste, vollstandig neu bearbeitete, tee Herausgegeben 
von Richard Engelmann. Berlin, 1893. 

Haicu = A. E. Haigh, The Attic Theatre. A Daseeiption of the Stage 
and Theatre of the Athenians and of the Dramatic Per :formances at 
Athens. 3d edit. Oxford, 1907. 

Hampy Bry er Rernacu = O. Hamdy Bey et Théodore Reinach, 
Une necropole royale a Sidon. Texte et Atlas. Paris, 1892. 

HARRISON AND VERRALL = Mythology and Monuments of Ancient 
Athens. Being a translation of a portion of the ‘ Attica’ of Pausanias 
by Margaret de G. Verrall, with introductory essay and archaeological 
commentary by Jane E. Harrison. London and New York, 1890. 

HaAvussouttirr = E. Pontremoli et B. Haussoullier, Didymes. Fou. 
illes de 1895 et 1896. Paris, 1904. 

Hruzey et DAumET=L. Heuzey et H. Daumet, Mission archeolo- 
gique de Macedoine. Paris, 1876. 

Hevuzey, Mont Olympe = L. Heuzey, Le Mont Olympe et l Acarnanie. 
Paris, 1860. 

HILLeR voN GAERTRINGEN = F. Frhr. Hiller von Gaertringen, 
Thera. Untersuchungen, Vermessungen und Ausgrabungen in den Jahren 
1895-1898. Unter Mitwirkung von W. Roemeay H. Dragendorff, ete. 
8 vols. Berlin, 1899-1904. 

HirscuFretp, T'ypologie = Gustav Hirschfeld, Zur Typologie grie- 
chischer Ansiedelungen im Alterthum. Published in Historische und phi- 
lologische Aufsdtze Ernst Curtius zu seinem siebenzigsten Geburtstage am 
zweitem September 1884 gewidmet, pp. 853-875. Berlin, 1884. } 

Hirtrorrr = J. J. Hittorff, Restitution du temple d’Empédocle a 
Selinonte, ou Varchitecture Helyearans chez les Grecs. ‘Texte et Atlas. 
Paris, 1851. 

Hitrrorrr ©t Zantu = J. I. Hittorff et L. Zanth, Architecture an- 
tique de la Sicile. Recueil des monuments de Ségeste et di Sclinonte. 
Paris, 1870. . 

Hocartnu = David George Hogarth, British Museum pie ee at 
Ephesus. The Archaic Artemisia. London, 1908. 

Homo.ie = Théophile Homolle, Fouilles de Delphes (1892-1903). 
5 vols. Paris, 1902-1906. 


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 383 


Homo.txe, Temp. Ath. Pron. = Th. Homolle, Le temple d’Athéna 
Pronaia. Extr.fr. the Revue de l’Art Ancien et Moderne. Paris, 1902. 

Ion. Antiq. = Antiquities of Ionia, published by the Society of Dilet- 
tanti. 4 vols. London, 1821-1881. 

IwanorF = Sergius A. Iwanoff, Architektonische Studien. Mit Er- 
lauterungen von Richard Bohn, August Mau und Christian Hiilsen. 
3 vols. Berlin, 1892-1898. 

KEKULE = Die Antiken Terracotten. 1. Die Terracotten von Pompeji 
bearbeitet von Hermann von Rohden. 2. Die Terracotten von Sicilien 
bearbeitet von Reinhard Kekulé. 2 vols. Stuttgart, 1880-1884. 

KoLpEwEy = Robert Koldewey, Die antiken Baureste der Insel Les- 
bos. Berlin, 1890. 

KOLDEWEY UND PucHSTEIN = Robert Koldewey und Otto Puch- 
stein, Die griechischen Tempeln in Unteritalien und Sicilien. 1 vol. 
text; 1 vol. plates. Berlin, 1899. 

Krause = Johann Heinrich Krause, Deinokrates oder Hiitte, Haus 
und Palast, Dorf, Stadt und Residenz der alten Welt. Jena, 1863. 

Krause, Gymn.= Johann Heinrich Krause, Die Gymnastik und 
Agonistik der Hellenen. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1841. 

KRELL = P. F. Krell, Geschichte des Dorischen Styls. Text and At- 
las. Stuttgart, 1870. 

LABROUSTE = Henri Labrouste. Les temples de Paestum. Res- 
tauration executé en 1829. [In Restaurations des monuments antiques 
par les architectes pensionnaires de l’academie de France a Rome. 
Paris, 1877-1884. ] 

Latoux = V. Laloux, L’architecture grecque. Paris, 1888. 

LANCKORONSKI = Stddte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens. Unter mitwir- 
kung von G. Niemann und E. Petersen, herausgegeben von Karl 
Grafen Lanckoronski. 2 vols. Vienna, 1890. 

LANGE = Konrad Lange, Haus und Halle. Studien zur Geschichte 
der antiken Wohnhauses und der Basilica. Leipzig, 1885. 

W. LANGE = Walther Lange, Das antike griechisch-rémische Wohn- 
haus. Leipzig, 1878. 

LAyARD = Austen Henry Layard, The Monuments of Nineveh. 
London, 1849. 

Leas, see Reinach-Lebas. 

LecHAT ET DrerrassE = Henri Lechat et Alphonse Defrasse (archi- 
tecte), Epidaure. Paris, 1895. 


384 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 


LECHAT, Sc. Attique = Henri Lechat. La sculpture attique avant 
Pheidias. Paris, 1904. | 

LecHAT, Temp. grec. = Henri Lechat, Le temple grec. Histoire som- 
maire de ses origines et de son développement jusqu’au V® siecle avant 
Jésus-Christ. Paris, 1902. 

LENORMANT ET De Witte = Ch. Lenormant et J. De Witte, Elite 
des monuments céramographiques. 4 vols. Paris, 1844-1861. . 

Lioyp-CocKERELL = W. W. Lloyd, Memoir on the Systems of Pro- 
portion employed in the design of the Doric Temples at Phigaleia and 
Aegina. Published in Cockerell’s Temples at Aegina and Bassae near 
Phigaleia, pp. 63-94. London, 1860. 

Lioyp-PENROsSE = W. W. Lloyd, On the General Theory of Pro- 
portion in Architectural Design, and its exemplification in detail in the 
Parthenon. Abstract of the paper read at the Royal Institute of Brit- 
ish Architects, 13 June, 1859. Published in Penrose, Principles of 
Athenian Architecture (1888), pp. 111-116. 

Lupus = Bernhard Lupus, Die Stadt Syrakus im Alterthum. Au- 
torisierte Deutsche Bearbeitung der Cavallari-Holm’schen Topograjfia 
Archeologica di Siracusa. Strassburg, 1887. 

pE LuyneEs = Le Duc de Luynes et F. J. Debacq, Metaponte. Paris, 
1833. 

Magnesia = Magnesia am Maeander. Bericht tiber die Ergebnisse 
der Ausgrabungen der Jahre 1891-1893 von Carl Humann. Die 


Bauwerke bearbeitet von Julius Kohte. Die Bildwerke bearbeitet 


von Carl Watzinger. Berlin, 1904. 

Marini = Luigi Marini, Vitruvii de architectura libri decem. 4 vols. 
Rome, 1836. 

Maxrtua = Jules Martha, L’art ¢trusque. Paris, 1889. 

Mav = August Mau, Pompeii. Translated by Francis W. Kelsey. 
New York, 1899. 

Mavucu = J. M. v. Mauch, Die Architektonischen Ordnungen der 
Griechen und Rémer. Siebente, neu bearbeitete, Auflage, mit Text 
von L. Lohde. Berlin, 1875. 

Maucu, Detailbuch = J. M. v. Mauch, Detailbuch zu den Architekton- 
ischen Ordnungen der Griechen, Rimer und neueren Baumeister. Berlin, 
1850. 

Megalopolis = Robert Weir Schultz and others, Excavations at Mega- 
lopolis 1890-1891. Suppl. Paper no. 1 of Society for Promotion of 
Hellenic Studies. London, 1892. 


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 385 


Mercket = Curt Merckel, Die Ingenieurtechnik im Alterthum.  Ber- 
lin, 1899. 

MippLeton = J. Henry Middleton, The Remains of Ancient Rome. 
2 vols. London, 1892. 

Murray, Hdbk. = A. 8S. Murray, Handbook of Greek Archaeology. 
New York, 1892. 

NewrTon = C. T. Newton, assisted by R. P. Pullan, A History of 
Discoveries at Halicarnassus, Cnidus, and Branchidae. 1 vol. plates, 
2 vols. text. London, 1862. 

Noack = Ferdinand Noack, Homerische Paliste. Eine Studie zu den 
Denkmilern und zum Epos. Leipzig, 1903. 

OEMICHEN = Oemichen, Griechischer Theaterbau. Berlin, 1886. 

Olympia = Olympia. Die Ergebnisse der von dem Deutschen Reich 
veranstalteten Ausgrabung. Herausgegeben von Ernst Curtius und 
Friedrich Adler. Tafelband I. Textband Hl. Die Baudenkméiler. 
Berlin, 1892-1896. _ 

OvERBECK = J. Overbeck, Geschichte der griechischen Plastik. 2 vols. 
Leipzig, 1893-1894. 

PAauLy-WissowA = Pauly’s Real-Encyclopiidie der classischen Alter- 
tumswissenshaft. Neue Bearbeitung unter Mitwirkung zahlreicher 
Fachgenossen herausgegeben von Georg Wissowa. Stuttgart, 1894- 

Paus. = TTAYSANIOY ELLAAO®S TIEPIHTHS1S. Pausaniae 
Descriptio Graeciae. Ed. Dindorf. Paris, 1882. | 

PENNETHORNE = John Pennethorne, Zhe Geometry and Optics of 
Ancient Architecture. Jondon, 1878. 

PENROSE = Francis Cranmer Penrose, An Investigation of the Prin- 
ciples of Athenian Architecture. New edit. London, 1888. 

PrnrOSE, Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. = F. C. Penrose, On the Orienta- 
tion of Greek Temples and the Dates of their Foundation derived from 
Astronomical Considerations, being a Supplement to a paper published 
in the Transactions of the Royal Society in 1893. Philosophical Trans- 
actions of the Royal Society for 1897. Vol. 190 A. London, 
1898. 

Pergamon = Altertiimer von Pergamon. Herausgegeben im Auftrage 
des k6niglich preussischen Ministers der geistlichen Unterrichts- und 
medicinal-Angelegenheiten. In course of publication since 1885. 

PERROT ET CuHIPIEZ = Georges Perrot et Charles Chipiez, Histoire 
de l'art dans Vantiquité. 8 vols. published. Paris, 1882-1903. 

2c 


386 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 


PERROT ET GUILLAUME = Georges Perrot et Edmond Guillaume, 
Exploration archéologique de la Galatie et de la Bithynie, etc. 2 vols. 
Paris, 1862. ) 

PETERSEN UND von Luscuan = Eugen Petersen und Felix von 
Luschan, Reisen in Lykien, Milyas, und Kibyratis. Wien, 1889. 

Petriz = W. M. Flinders Petrie, Egyptian Decorative Art. New 
York and London, 1895. 

Petrik, Kahun = W. M. Flinders Petrie, I/lahun, Kahun, and Gurob, 
1889-1890. London, 1891. 

Perriz, Naukratis = W. M. Flinders Petrie, Naukratis. Part TI, 
1884-1885, with chapters by Cecil Smith, Ernest Gardner, and Barclay 
V. Head. London, 1886. = 

Piiny = C. Plinius Secundus, Historia naturalis. Libri 37. Ed. 
Littré. 2 vols. Paris, 1883. | 

PONTREMOLI ET HAUSSOULLIER = E. Pontremoli (architecte) et B. 
Haussoullier, Didymes. Fouilles de 1895 et 1896. Paris, 1904. 

Priene = Priene. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Untersuch- 
ungen in den Jahren 1895-1898, von Theodor Wiegand und Hans 
Schrader, unter Mitwirkung von G. Kummer, W. Wilberg, H. Winne- 
feld, R. Zahn. Berlin, 1904. 

PRIssE D’AVENNES = Prisse d’Avennes, Histoire de l'art égyptien 
d’apres les monuments. Texte par P. Marchandon dela Faye. Paris, 1879. 

PUCHSTEIN = Otto Puchstein, Die griechische Biihne.. Eine archi- 
tektonische Untersuchung. Berlin, 1901. 

Pucustein, Jon. Cap. = Otto Puchstein, Das JIonische Capitell. 
Berlin, 1887. 

PucustTeEIN, Jon. Séul. = Otto Puchstein, Die Ionische Sdule. Leip- 
zig, 1907. 

PUCHSTEIN UND KoLpEWEyY. See Koldewey und Puchstein. 

Quast = Ferdinand von Quast, Das Erechtheion zu Athen. Berlin, 
1862. . 

REBER = Franz von Reber, History of Ancient Art. Translated by 
Joseph Thacher Clarke. New York, 1887. — 

Reinacu-LeBas = Philippe Lebas, Voyage archéologique en Gréce 
et en Asie Mineure. Publiées et commentées par Salomon Reinach. 
Paris, 1888. 

REINHARDT = Robert Reinhardt, Die Gesetzmdssigkeit der grie- 
chischen Baukunst. Erster Theil: Der Theseustempel in Athen. Stutt- 
gart, 1903. 


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 387 


RENAN = Ernest Renan, Mission de Phénicie. Texte et Atlas. 


~ Paris, 1864. 


Dr Rocuas = A. de Rochas d’Aiglun, Principes de la fortification 
antique. Paris, 1881. 

Ross-ScHAUBERT-HANSEN = L. Ross, E. Schaubert, Ch. Hansen, 
Der Tempel der Nike Apteros. Berlin, 1839. 

SCHLIEMANN, Myken. = Heinrich Schliemann, Mee Bericht 
tiber meine Forschungen und Entdeckungen in Mykenae und Tiryns. 
Leipzig, 1878. 

SCHLIEMANN, Tiryns = Henry Schliemann, Tiryns. The Prehistoric 
Palace of the Kings of Tiryns. New York, 1885. 

SCHREIBER = Th. Schreiber, Atlas of Classical Antiquities. New 
York, 1895. 

ScHREIBER, fell. Reliefb. = Theodor Schreiber, Die Hellenistischen 
Reliefbilder. 112 Tafelu. Leipzig, 1894. 

SCHUCHHARDT = C. Schuchhardt, Schliemann’s Excavations. Lon- 
don, 1891. ) 

Scuuttz = W. Schultz, Die Harmonie in der Baukunst. Nachweisung 
der Proportionalitdt in den Bauwerken des griechischen Altertums. Han- 
nover, Linden, 1891. 

SEMPER, Vorlduf. Bemerk. = Gottfried ‘Semper, Vorldufige Bemerk- 
ungen tiber bemalte Architektur und Plastik bei den Alten. Altona, 1834. 

Sitrnt = Karl Sittl, Archacologie der Kunst. [= Vol. 6 of Iwan von 
Miiller, Handbuch der klassischen Altertums-Wissenschaft.| Munich, 
1895. 

Smitu = A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. Edited by 
William Smith, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin. 2 vols. London, 
1890-1891. 

SMITH AND PorcHeR = R. Murdoch Smith and E. A. Porcher, His- 


tory of the Recent Discoveries at Cyrene made during an Expedition to 


the Cyrenaica in 1860-1861. London, 1864. 

STERRETT = J. R.S. Sterrett, The Wolfe Expedition to Asia Minor. 
Papers of American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. III. 
Boston, 1888. 

STreGuitz = C. L. Stieglitz, Archaeologie der Baukunst der Griechen 
und Rémer. 2 vols. Weimar, 1801. 

StronG = Mrs. Arthur Strong, Roman Sculpture from Augustus to 
Constantine. Wondon and New York, 1907. 


388 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS _ 


Srrzycowski, Byz. Denkm. = Josef Strzygowski, Byzantinische 
Denkmdler. 3 vols. Vienna, 1891-1903. 

STUART AND ReEveTT = John Stuart and Nicholas Revett, The An- 
 tiquities of Athens. 4 vols. London, 1762-1796. 


StrurGis = Russell Sturgis, A History of Architecture. Vol. I. 


Antiquity. New York, 1906. 

TAYLOR AND CreEsy = G. L. Taylor and Edward Cresy, The Archi- 
tectural Antiquities of Rome. 2 vols. London, 1821-1822. 

TEXIER = Charles Texier, Description de Asie Mineure. 8 vols. 
Paris, 1839-1849. 

TEXIER, Arménie = Charles Texier, Description de l’Arménie, la 
Perse et la Mésopotamie. 2 vols. Paris, 1842-1852. 

TEXIER AND PULLAN = The Principal Ruins of Asia Minor. Lon- 
don, 1865. 

Torr = Cecil Torr, Ancient Ships. Cambridge, 1895. 

TsountAs—MANATT = Chrestos Tsountas and J. Irving Manatt, 
The Mycenaean Age. Boston and New York, 1897. 


TuCKERMANN = Tuckermann, Das Odeum des Herodes Atticus und — 


der Regilla in Athen. Bonn, 1868. 

UnbeE = Constantin Uhde, Die Konstruktionen und die Kunstformen 
der Architektur. Ihre Entstehung und geschichtliche Entwickelung bei 
den verschiedenen Volkern. 4 vols. (8 published). _ Berlin, 1902-1904. 

Virruvius = M. Vitruvius Pollio, De architectura libri decem. 
Ed. by Valentine Rose. Leipzig, 1899. 

De Voaut = Le Comte Melchior de Vogiié et W. H. Waddington, 
La Syrie Centrale. Architecture civile et religieuse du I au VII siecle. 
2 vols. Paris, 1865. 

DE Voatik, Temp. Jérus. = le C'® Melchior de Vogiie, Le temple de 


Jérusalem. Monographie du Haram-ech-chérif, suivie d’un essai sur 


la Topographie de la Ville-Sainte par M. de Vogiié. Paris, 1864. 

WALDSTEIN = Charles Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum. 2 vols. 
Boston and New York, 1902-1905. 

WIEGAND = Dice archaische Poros-Architektur der Akropolis zu Athen. 
Herausgegeben von Theodor Wiegand unter Mitwirkung von W. 
Doerpfeld, E. Gilliéron, H. Schrader, C. Watzinger und W. Wilberg. 
1 vol. text, 1 vol. plates. Cassel u. Leipzig, 1904. © 

WINCKELMANNSPROGRAMME = Programme zum Winckelmannsfeste 
der archaeologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin. Berlin, 1841- 


FIG. 
. Curved adze. Bliimner II, 340, from Lenormant et De Witte, 


12. 
18. 


14, 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


= peg aa a a : : ; ; * : 
Floor of Arsenal at Berens. Choisy, Htudes, Pl. 2 
Wall of a building at Bir Sgaoun, Algeria. Gsell, II, Pl. 75 
Restoration of Proto-Doric Entablature. Perrot et Chipiez, VI, 
19°: ; : : : é A 
Sarcophagus from Gjélbaschi-Trysa. Jb. Oecsterr. Kunsth. 
Samml., XI, 24 : : ; , 
Roof construction of Arsenal at Pee ioas, Choisy, Ktudes, 
Pl. 2 : ; F i ; 
Brick wall bonded with wood ‘Schuchhardt, 52 
Roofing tiles hooked together. Olympia, I, Taf. 41 . : 
Tenons for lifting drums of columns. Fox collection of photo- 
graphs 


. Gallery of South Wall, Pirin. fccenan Institute photograph . 
. Retaining wall of Temple of vant Delphi. Perrot et Chi- 


piez, VII, 330 . : ; : : : 
Polygonal masonry from Battikon visernatt Institute photo- 
graph “ : : ‘ ; ‘ 
Equal coursed Patou at Rraenesie German Institute photo- 
graph : 
Regular, but gascual, Raia as foi ‘Agripos Montes 
ment, Athens. Bohn, Taf. 21 


15-18. Clamps of various shapes. Durm, 78 


19. 
20. 


21. 
22. 
23. 
24. 
25. 


Notched masonry at Eretria. Photograph by me M. : 

Anathyrosis from wall of Propylaia, athens. Fox collection 
of photographs : 

Diatonikon masonry. Perrot et ‘Chipiez, VI, 337 

Door-frame at Naxos. Photograph by A. M. 

Base from Erechtheion, Athens. Choisy, I, 347 

Base from Temple of Nike, Athens. Choisy, I, 347 . 

Epistyle from Parthenon. Penrose, Pl. 16 : ‘ : ° 

389 


PAGE 


390 


FIG. 


51. 
52. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


Epistyle of Temple D, Selinous. Koldewey und Puchstein, 109 


. Triglyphal frieze of Parthenon. Penrose, Pl. 17 

. Cornice of Temple D, Selinous. Koldewer und Puchsten 109 
. Parthenon coffering. Penrose, Pl. 15 

. Acroterion block of the Parthenon. Penrose, PI. 7 

. Base of Temple at Stratos in Akarnania. From German Insti- 


tute photograph 


. Podium of Temple of Despoina a Ly hoeeaee ons German 


Institute photograph : ; ; ; : ; : ‘ 
Podium of Theron’s Tomb, Akragas. Photograph by Sommer 
Base of Kyniskos statue. Olympia, I, Taf. 92. 


. Base of statue of Nike, Olympia. Olympia, II, Taf. 98 
. Base of Roman statue, Olympia. Olympia, IU, Taf. 94 
. Acropolis wall, showing set-backs. Pergamon. Photograph 


by A. M.. : , : : 


. Apsidal wall of Bycaocae Chureks innit Olympia, I, 


Taf. 68 


. Wall of Arsenal at Pelee Ghote Etudes, Pl. 1 


Wall of Treasury of Phocaeans, Delphi. From a photograph . 


. Wall of circular building at the Marmoria, Delphi. From a 


photograph 


. Wall crown from Teniple of Ze Olympis Olympia, I. 


Taf. 12 


. Wall crown of Breeton, Athens. Stuart and Revett, II, 


Ch, 2. PIA7 


. Plan of Anta from Troy. " Doerpfeld, Troja ‘and Ricoh bi 81, 


Fig. 23 


. Plan of Anta earn ee gebliguaen Teena. Pl, 2 
. Plan of Anta from the Heraion, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 18 
. Plan of Anta from the Enneastylos, Paestum. Koldewey und 


Puchstein, Fig. 15 : ; ‘ ; : ; 
Plan of Anta from Temple D, Salinbuse Koldewey und Puech- 
stein, Taf. 13 . 


. Plan of Anta from Temple of Poasiaent Passe ‘kee 


und Puchstein, Taf. 4 


. Plan of Anta from Temple of dene lye: Gloves I, 


Taf. 9 : : : ‘ ; 
Anta base from the Giada: Olympian Olympia, I, Taf. 48 
Anta base from the Theseion, Athens. Stuart and Revett, III, 

Chi, Pi 


erik 


PAGE 


49 
51 
52 
53 
54 


57 


59 © 


60 
61 
62 
62 
65 
66 
67 
68 
68 
68 


68 


Ae) oa oP 


FIG. 
53. 


54. 


55, 


56. 


57. 
58. 


59. 


60. 


61. 


62. 


63. 
64. 
65. 


66. 
67. 
68. 
69. 
70. 
at 
72. 
73. 


74, 
75. 
76. 
(ve 


78. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


Anta base from the Temple of Nike, Athens. Ross-Schaubert- 
Hansen, Taf. 10 ‘ ; ; 2 < : 

Anta base from the Pekchikeion. Stuart and Revett, II, Ch. II, 
PUSs : é : ‘ : ; 5 

Anta capital from the onoesty ier Paestum. Koldewey und 
Puchstein, Fig. 11 A ; ‘ ; : 

Anta aacital from Temple G, Selioun Hittorff et Zanth, Pl. 
79, Fig. 5 , : 5 : ‘ 

Anta capital from the Eraoylais., tera Bohn, Taf. 13, Fig. 3 

Anta capital from Temple of Poseidon, Sounion. Jon. Antigq., 
H,-Pl. 14. : 5 i 

Anta capital from he Temple of Nike, ivere Ross-Schau- 
bert-Hansen, Taf. 10 : : : : ‘ 

Anta capital from the iesebtheion, Stuart and Revett, IT, 
otk bl. 18: : : : 

Anta capital from the Theatre Pe piiauee renee et De- 
frasse, 211 

Anta capital from the Souisls of Kaus, Miletos. cee Anti : 
Ta Oech 

Gateway at Mycenae. Seu cenn, mM tan: : Big: 23 

Gateway at Elaios, Aetolia. Perrot et Chipiez, VII, Pl. 11 

Doorway of Tomb at Orchomenos. Perrot et Bien VI, 
Fig. 162 . 

Gateway at Oiniadai. Einar: Mont emee Pl. 15 

Gateway at Oiniadai. Heuzey, Mont Olympe, Pl. 15 

Gateway at Messene. Perrot et Chipiez, VII, Pl. 11 

Gateway at Assos. Clarke, Assos Report, I (1882), Pl. 27 

Gateway at Phigaleia. Perrot et Chipiez, VII, 341, Pl. 11. 

Gateway at Oiniadai. Heuzey, Mont Olympe, Pl. 15 

Gateway at Assos. Perrot et Chipiez, VII, Pl. 11 ; 

Window from Temple of Concordia, Akragas. Serradifalco, 
III, Tav. 11 ; . ; 

Low Doric base from Creek Temple at Davaaic Von Duhn 
und Jacobi, Taf. 5 . ; A 

Base from Naukratis. Petrie, Naukratis, I, Pl. 3 

Base from Kolumdado, Lesbos. Koldewey, Taf. 16. 

Base from archaic Temple of Artemis, Ephesos. J.H.S., X 
(1889), Pl. 3 : ‘ : : 

Base from the Temple of Discekae: soe Ion. Antig., IV, 
Pl Bb. =; . é ; ; - : : : ; ; : 


391 


PAGE 


72 


72 


72 


73 


73 


74 


74 


75 


75 


75 
17 
17 


77 
77 
(i 
78 
78 
78 
78 
78 


79 
81 
81 
82 
82 


82 


392 


FIG. 


100. 


101. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS — 


PAGE 
. Base from the. Temple of Dionysos Bresaios, Lesbos. Kolde- 
wey, Pl. 28 . wv ie ocee 
Base from the pronaos of the ipanrpta of Athena: Prone! tea 
Antiq., IV, Pl. 11. 4 ' 4 : : , : oe ee 
. Base from the Erechtheion, Athens. d’Espouy, Pl. 11 . MeN! 
. Base from inner order of the Propylaia, Athens. Pennethorne, 
Part TV, Pl. 41 ‘ ; 84 
. Base from the Choragic Moutitlent eo Lancers Aciode 
Stuart and Revett, I,'Ch. 4, Pl. 5 . : ; : . 88 
Base from the Temple of Dionysos, Pergamon. Bohn, Temp. ' 
Dion. Perg., Taf. 1 ‘ : - : : : oa Sa 
Base from the Leonidaion, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf.65 . 85 © 
. Shaft in relief from Lions’ Gate, Mycenae. Perrot et Chipiez, 
Vi, Pie i4 : 87 
. Shaft from Tavola dei Paladini, Metapohitens De Luynes A 
Debacgq, Pl. 5 : ; .- 88 
. Shaft from the Propylaia, “Athens Pennies Pl. 33 j ee 


Apophyge on shaft from the Temple of Nike, Athens. Ross- 
Schaubert-Hansen, Taf. 7. : 90 


. Apophyge on shaft from the Temple of ‘Apooe Phigalefa. 


Cockerell, Pl. 14. =. ; 91 


. Concave necking on capital from Temas D, Saline Hittortf 


et Zanth, Pl. 32. y 4 ; Se 


. Convex necking on capital fois Naanaeen "Beret et Chi- 


piez, VII, 624 : ; mes ee la ee a) | 


. Plat-band necking on capital fiona ve Brechthoiats Stuart 


and Revett, II, Ch. II, Pl. 5. : 92 


. Archaic capital from Delos. Perrot et Chipiez, Vu, Pi 58, 1 92 
. Archaic capital from Athens. Perrot et Chipiez, VII, Pl. 53,4 93. 
96. 
. Pulvinus of archaic capital from Athens. Perrot et Chipiez, 


Archaic capital from Athens. Perrot et Chipiez, VII, Pl. 53,5 94 


VII, Pl. 53, 5 : : : 2 OR 


. Pulvinus of capital from the Terpis of Athena Prone Ion 


Antiq., IV, Pl. 10. ; . une 


. Pulvinus of capital from the Peienle of Apollo: M ilstoe: en 


Antig., I, Ch. 3, PL 6 . : Pra) 
Pulvinus of capital from the Palast, Olyipis Civinte: II, 


Taf Tat ee ee a eae 


Echinus capital from ths, Hastions Samos. ‘Toh Antiq., I, 
Ch5)Pi3. : , ; , : : , , Me, 


~~ ee a ee 


ween eee aye 


ee eo. Ce. ae ae ie ae 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


. Conical capital from the Heraion, Olympia... Olympia, I, 


Taf. 22, 8. 3 


. Echinus of capital from the Temple of PakesiGn, Psat 


mures, Pl]. 


. Echinus of capital from Peta eChaley: I, 399 
. Bell-shaped capital from Tower of the Winds, Athens. Stuart 


and Revett, I, Ch. 3, Pl. 7 


. Cyma recta moulding on votive column, Athens, Ant. Denk., 


I, Taf. 29 , : 


. Cyma recta moulding on capital hae the eaiple of Davos 


Pergamon. Bohn, Temp. Dion. Perg., Taf. 1 


. Plan of abacus of corner column, Erechtheion. Durm, 251 
. Plan of abacus of Monument of Lysicrates, Athens. Durm, 


286 


. Abacus of the Parthenon. Penrose, Pl. 16 

. Abacus of the Erechtheion. d’Espouy, Pl. 14 

. Abacus of the Mausoleion at Halikarnassos. Newton, Pl. 22, . 

. Abacus of Monument of Lysicrates, Athens. d’Espouy, Pl. 21 
. Abacus of the Olympieion, Athens. Penrose, Pl. 38 

. Abacus of the Leonidaion, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 64 

. Crowning Moulding of Epistyle of: Old Temple of Athena, 


Athens. Wiegand, 2 


. Crowning Moulding of Epistyle of Temale C, Belmoue Kolde- 


_ wey und Puchstein, 103 


. Crowning Moulding of Epistyle of Temple of Gonsordin eek 


gas. Koldewey und Puchstein, 172 


. Crowning Moulding of Epistyle of Propylaia, Athens PPh. 


rose, Pl. 31 


. Crowning Moulding of Epiatyle of crempie of Nike, Achange 


d’Espouy, Pl. 7 


. Crowning Moulding of Bpistyle of Tholos at eta aaroe te 


chat et Defrasse, Pl. 7 


. Crowning Moulding of Epistyle of the Temple of pote 


Magnesia. Magnesia, 51 


3. Antithema of Epistyle of Temple of Teeter: BAM Kolde- 


wey und Puchstein, Fig. 17 


. Antithema of Epistyle from the Divmpieion! wihene Durm, 


293 


5. Antithema of mpistyle fs the Teenie of Avteitiay Magnesia. 


Magnesia, 51. 


393 
PAGE 
96 


96 
97 


97 
98 


98 
98 


99 
99 © 


394 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


ee oe oe 


FIG. PAGE 
126. Triangular grooves, Temple of Poseidon, Paestum. Koldewey 

und Puchstein, 29 . : ‘ ; ~> 109 
127. Semicircular grooves, Temple of Apolial Metapeninte Kolde- 
wey und Puchstein, 39 . ; : . 109 
128. Triglyph from the Treasury of Metapeniiien: tpt: Olym- 

pia, I, Taf. 35,4 . : 109 
129. Triglyph from Temple C, dainede. ‘Koldeway und ‘Puchistein. 

100 : é : « VENRS 


130. Triglyph from the Prominie Athans pow Tat. 13 : Pea q 
131. Triglyph from the Temple of Concordia, Akragas. Serradi- 


falco, IIE, Tay. 18... . 1.) Sas eee ee 
1382. Triglyph from the Tholos at Epidants, Lechat et Defrasse, 

Phi Bin ‘ : é 3 ; - ns ee 
133. Frieze of the Pasion Pens: Brent 134-135 ‘ : aes i 
134. Frieze of Stoa of Hadrian, Athens. Mauch, Taf. 42 : SSE 
185. Convex Frieze from the Temple of Zeus, Labranda. Jon. y 

Antiq., I, Ch. 4, Plo ; ; Patan He } 
186. Cyma recta Frieze from the Tholos at Holdnares. “Tectat et 

Defrasse, Pl. 7 A : od Ee 
137. Cornice with mutules from ae Tetnpls of Zeus. Olympia. 

Olympia, I, Taf. 14 : ; ; : : f as WS 


138. Cornice with dentils from Priene. Priene, Figs. 68, 74 . avd 8 
189. Dentil frieze from Tomb of Amyntas, Telmessos. Benndorf 


and Niemann, Taf. 17 . ; P « 118 
140. Cornice with consoles from interior of ee of ‘Winds, Athens. 

Stuart and Revett, I, Ch. 3, Pl. 9. : ‘ . 114 
141. Cornice with coffering from the Temple of Demsver, Passennt 

Koldewey und Puchstein, 19 ; : : 4 P 114 
142. Cornice of Erechtheion, Athens. Stuart and Revett, II, Ch. 2, 

N See en ‘ ‘ 115 
148. Subdivided cornice tri the Treasary of Gan Olyipls. 

Olympia, I, Taf. 41. i 115 
144. Coffered ceilings with, and without, heat Score ne Temple 

of Apollo, Phigaleia. Cockerell, Pl.9. ° . : 116 
145. Ceiling beam from Parthenon. Stuart and Revett, II, Ch. 1, 

Pl.4. ; ‘ Lié 
146. Ceiling beam from the Temple of Anolon Miletos, *Pinceaeke 

hier; Pils... 2,13 : : ae niga WY: 
147. Ceiling beam from the Temple of Tene Aizanoi. Wetien I, 

Phd tas , : : ; ; : 4 ; , oe 


FIG. 
148, 


149. 
150. 
151. 
152. 


153. 
154. 


155. 
156. 
157. 
158. 
159. 
160. 
161. 
162. 
163. 
164. 
165. 
166. 


167. 
168. 


169. 


170. 


ait. 


172. 
173. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 395 


PAGE 

Cofferings from the Theseion, Athens. Stuart and Revett, 
Piel. bh Te ; : P - 118 
Cofferings from the Temple of Athena: PHisaé: d ihadss Fig. 68 119 


Cofferings from the Philippeion, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 79 119 
Roof tiles from the Heraion, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 98. 121 
Roof tiles from the Treasury of Gela, Olympia. Olympia, U1, 


Taf. 99 . : j ; aces : ; eee 
Roof tiles from the Bariieniot. Spiraea, Peolg j ‘ Seb 22 
Roof tiles from the Monument of Lysicrates, Athens. Stuart 

and Revett, I, Ch. 4, Pl. 3. : : ; ; el bee 
Ridge tile from the Temple of A ohio Aegina. Cockerell, 

jet att : ; : ‘ ; 11. 128 
Sima of the tieasary. of Gela, Gr npik Olympia, I, Taf. 41 123 
Sima of the Parthenon. Penrose, Pl. 1 . : j 3 vv ES 
Sima of the Temple of Aphaia, Aegina. Cockerell, Pl. 13 «123 
Sima of the Temple of Athena, Priene. Priene, Fig. 74. so bZo 
Sima with water spout, Athens Museum. Durm, 137. 124 
Central acroterion from the Heraion, Olympia. Olympia, IL, 

Taf. 84 . j 4 124 
Lateral acroterion from +6 Old Tennis. of Athena: ‘Aseny 

Wiegand, Taf.9 . : « ,125 
Lozenge decoration of bailing of the Philippeioh, Olympia. 

Olympia, II, Taf. 82,8 . : : ‘ ; ~ 150 
Bead and reel, also egg and dart sneak Olympia, I, 

Taf. 82, 3 : : ; . 150 
Zigzag ornament from the Tholos of ‘Atvtina, Myoernds Perrot 

et Chipiez, VI, Fig. 283 , o EGE 
Maeander from the Treasury of Salar Gai cnvpt: On ympia, I, 

Taf. 41 . P ; vo RE 
Maeander from Olympia. ae. 17; Taf. 118, 2 Se ame ee 
Maeander from archaic cornice from Athens. Wiegand, 

pat, ¥,. 2 ; ; é ; ..* 162 
Maeander from the S.E. paildings Gisnpes oa Ii, 

Dale elo. ; F ae 3) 
Maeander from the Pesantley of siky on, Diyweia: Olympia, 

iTat. 118, 3 ; : : . ¢ S163 
Scroll pattern from the rier, “olympia: Olympia, I, 

aki . : 152 


Scroll pattern from Rescue Bose et Chipisn, VI, ‘Pl, XL, 2 1538 
Scroll pattern from Olympia. Olympia, Il, Taf. 118,2 . . 158 


396 


FIG. 
174, 
175. 
176. 
177. 
178. 
179. 
180. 


181. 
182. 
183. 


184. 
185. 
186. 
187. 
188. 


189. 
190. 


191. 
192. 
193. 
194. 
195. 


196. 


197. 
198. 


199. 
200. 
201. 
202. 
203. 
204. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


PAGE 
Scroll pattern from the Erechtheion, Athens. d’Espouy, Pl. 12 153 
Braid pattern from Athéns. Wiegand, Taf.9,1 . ; . 154 
Braid pattern from Athens. Wiegand, Taf.7,4 . ; . 154 
Braid pattern from Athens. Wiegand, Taf.9,4 . 4 . 154 
Braid pattern from Athens. Wiegand, Taf. 7,3 . : « 155 


Ceiling of Tholos at Orchomenos. Schuchhardt, Fig. 290 . 155 
Doric leaf pattern from the Bae of Themis at Rhamnous. 
Fenger, Taf. 7,3 . : : ; A ; : . 156 
Egg and dart pattern from Ol rae Olympia, Il, Taf. 118, 2 156 
Doric leaf pattern from Olympia. Olympia, Il, Taf. 118,5 . 157 
Ionic leaf pattern from the sees Museum, Athens. Fox 
collection of photographs . ; Sey 
Rosette pattern from Tiryns. Schliematin: Tignes BBs 4 FP SIs) Bots 
Rosette pattern from Athens. Wiegand, Taf. 9,2. : . 159 
Rosette pattern from Epidauros. Lechat et Defrasse, Pl.6 .- 159 
Rosette pattern from Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 120, 2 . 160 
Palmette pattern from the Leonidaion, Olympia. Olympia, II, 


Eads k ee eee é ; ; wee tae 
Palmette and lotus Baier hea Olympia, Olympia, II, 

Fat 2) FAS ; : . 162 
Palmette and lotus pattern bors Temple c, Senna Winck- 

elmannsprogramme, 41, Taf.2  . : : : : Wabad Liye 
Archaic antefix in A. M. private collection : . 164 


Steps from the Leonidaion, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 66 2 206 
Steps from the Philippeion, Olympia. Olympia, I], Taf. 80 . 166 


Pavement from palace at Phaistos. A. M. notebook : 2167 

Door-tracks from the Temple of Athena, Priene. <A. M. Hee 
book : OT 

Profile of door- nels oui the Temple of Aahege Briones! 

A. M. notebook . : : : : 8 188 
Wall from Priene. A. M. Snotoerye ; : « 490 
Epikranitis from the Temple of Aphaia, reMa \Cockereli 

Pls. 8-9 . ; : ; : ; : ee Wg 
Epikranitis from the Parchenon) Pai Pitoea. : nos 
Western window, Erechtheion. Quast, Abth. I, Taf.1 . . 174 
North door of the Erechtheion. Fox collection of photographs 175 
Anta capital from Aegina. Cockerell, Pl. 8 . : : Med 


Anta capital from the Parthenon. Penrose, Pl. 23. . . Se 
Pilaster capital from the Temple of Apollo, Miletos. Texier 
and Pullan, Pl.6 . A : 2 : : 2 5 Rte Wa 


+ 
j=“ - 


CN i Di 
4. 


FIG. 
205. 


206. 
207. 


208. 


209. 


210. 


211. 
212. 
213. 


214. 
215. 


216. 


217. 


218. 
219. 


220. 
221. 


222. 
223. 
224. 
225. 
226. 
227. 
228. 
229. 
230. 
231. 
232. 
233. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


Anta capital from the Propylon at Pergamon. Pergamon, II, 
Taf. 30 . : ‘ . ; ; 3 . 

Anta capital from ees Perrot et Guillaume, II, Pl. 31 

Column base from early and late Temple of Hera at Samos. 
A.M. photograph . ; : : : 

Column base from North Porch of Wreskiicion. A. M. photo- 
graph : : 

Column base from the Temple of Teen near Miletos. A. M. 
photograph 

Column channellings on the Aaiacls of Demetee, Pacetnen 
Koldewey und Puchstein, Fig. 21. : : . 

Column channellings from the Parthenon. d’Espouy, Pl. 20. 

Column channellings from Pergamon. Pergamon, I, Taf. 25, 3 

Column channellings from the Temple of Zeus, Aizanoi. Texier, 
i Peat ml Sore | é “ ‘ p 

Column channellings from the reantholon! d’Espouy, Pl. 12 

Channellings from the Tower of the Winds, Athens. Stuart 
and Revett, I, Ch. 3, Pl. 9 

Channellings from the Monument of Eiraete NESE 
Stuart and Revett, I, Ch. 4, Pl. 6. ; : 

Sculptured drum from ehe empls of Artemis, Hplieaos! N M. 
photograph 7 

Incised annulus from Tomule D, Berirone: Krell, Tat. 1 

Annuli from the Treasury of Gela, Olympia. Olympia, I, 
Taf. 40 . . : ; : ; : . ’ . 

Annuli from Phigaleia. Cockerell, Pl. 8. : : f 

Kanephoros from Knidian Treasury, Delphi. Homolle, IV, 
Pl. 20 : ; ; ‘ ; : : 

Neck of capital from eens: German Institute photograph 

Neck of capital from Paestum. Puchstein, Fig. 40, 1 

Neck of capital from Paestum. Puchstein, Fig. 40, 2 

Neck of capital from Naukratis. A. M. photograph 

Neck of capital from Magnesia. Magnesia, Fig. 103 

Capital on a vase from Hagia Triada, Crete. G. B.A. (1907), 99 

Capital from the Palaistra, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 75 

Capital from Delos. Perrot et Chipiez, VII, Pl. 53, 3 

Capital from Phigaleia. Cockerell, Pl. 14 

Capital from the Propylaia, Athens. Bohn, Taf. 12 

Capital from the Philippeion, Olympia. Olympia, II, Taf. 81 

Capital from Magnesia. Magnesia, Fig. 35 : 


397 
PAGE 


179 
180 


181 
182 
183 


185 
186 
186 


186 
187 


188 
188 


189 
191 


191 
191 


192 
193 
194 
194 
195 
196 
196 
196 
197 
197 
198 
198 
199 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


Denk., Taf. 29, 1 


FIG. PAGE 
234. Capital from the Erechtheion. Photograph from cast . 199 
235. Pilaster capital from Mégara Hyblaea. Mon. Ant., 1, Tav.2bis. 200 
236. Capital from Samothrace. . Conze-Hauser-Benndorf, II, Taf.27 200 
237. Pulvinus decoration from Delphi. Perrot et Chipiez, VII, 

Pl. 54, 4 : : : F . 203 
238. Pulvinus decoration from ie Erechthelan: Stuart and Revett, 

I; Che 2, Vie, : : ; : ‘ 203 
239. Pulvinus decoration from Maatieces Magnesia, Fig. 35 208 
240. Pulvinus decoration from Pergamon. Pergamon, Il, Taf. 23. 204 
241. Pulvinus decoration from Priene. Priene, Fig. 105 .. 204 
242. Pulvinus decoration from Ionic Temple, Pergamon. Perga- 

mon, 1V, Taf. 37 ; 5 : ~ 206 
243. Pulvinus decoration from Salamis, Cyprus: A.M. photograph 205 
244. Capital from the Heraion, Samos. A. M. photograph 206 
245. Annuli from Old Temple, Aegina. Furtwangler, Fig. 99 208 
246. Annuli from Temple C, Selinous. Koldewey und Puchstein, 

Pig. 76. ‘ P ; : ? . 208 
247. Annuli from Temple D, Sennous Koldewey und Puchstein, 

Fig. 84 . : : j P 208 
248. Annuli from the Parthouae Penrose, Pl. 19, 1 208 
249, Annuli from Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 88 208 
250. Annuli from Agora Gate, Athens. Stuart and Revett, I, Ch. 1 

Pl. 2 : F } 209 
251. Annuli from Cadsechio. Krell, Taf. 3 : 209 
252. Capital from Thebes, XVIII dyn., Egypt. Durm, 285 210 
253. Capital from the Theatre of Dionysos, Athens. Durm, 285 210 
254. Capital aa the Stoa of Eumenes, Pergamon. Pergamon, Il, 

Taf. 25, : ; z , 210 
255. Capital aud E] Bersheh, Ee gypt. Foucart, 155 211 
256. Capital from Thebes, XIX dyn., Egypt. Durm, Fig. 202 211 
257. Capital from Phigaleia. Durm, Fig. 202 : ee fe: 
258. Capital from the Tholos at Epidauros. Fox collection of 

photographs : : : « ( BAQ 
259. Capital from Monn miedt of Teen Athens. Durm, 

Fig. 202 : , ; : 5 oro 
260. Capital from the Philippeton: Olynipus Olympia, II, Taf. 81, 

No. 3 ; : , ; 214 
261. Capital from the Cisinnieion, ‘A thew Penrose, Pl. 39 , 215 
262. Capital from the votive offering of Aischines, Athens. Ant. 


215 


5 Rte 
dirt 


ae a ee 
"as 


FIG. 


263. 
264. 


265. 
266. 


267. 
268. 
269. 


270. 


271. 


272. 
273. 


O74, 
275. 


276. 


277. 


278. 
279. 
280. 
281. 


282. 


283. 


284. 


285. 
286. 
287. 


288. 
289. 


290. 
291. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


Capital from the votive offering of Evenor. Jhb., III, 275 

Abacus from Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 35, 5 

Abacus from Athens. Ant. Denk., I, Taf. 29, 2 

Abacus from Aphrodisias. Texier and Pullan, Pl. 30 

Epistyle from Myra. Texier and Pullan, Pl. 45 

Epistyle from the Parthenon. Penrose, Pl. 22 ‘ 

Epistyle crown from altar at Pergamon. . Pergamon, III, 
Taf.16 . i ; : ; 

Epistyle soffit, Bi adsia. Mey neste Fig. 35 . 

Epistyle soffit, Priene. Priene, Figs. 68, 70 

Epistyle soffit from Pergamon. Pergamon, IV, Taf. 34 

Metope decoration from Thermon. German Institute photo- 
graph : ‘ ; ‘ 

Metope from Siehenry of Linenions, Delphi. Homolle, IV, 
Pl. 41 : ‘ E 

Metope from the old Temple of Athena, athena Wiegand, 
10, 11 é ; ; : : 

Triglyph from Tetaple c, Belinous Koldewey und Puch- 
stein, Fig. 74. : ; : : ; ; 

Frieze from Knossos. £B.S.A., VI (1899-1900), 14 

Frieze from the Stoa at Pergamon... Pergamon, II, Taf. 28 

Frieze from Propylon, Pergamon. Pergamon, HU, Taf. 29, 5 

Frieze from the Propylon, Pergamon. Pergamon, II, Taf. 30 

Frieze from Treasury of the Knidians, Delphi. Homolle, IV, 
Pl. 9 i i é ; ‘ 

Cap mouldings of fess, Parthenon. Stuart and Revett, IJ, 
Crt Eb 2 P : ; : ; 

Cap moulding of frieze, Halicarmnasns: Newton, I, Pl. 22 

Cap moulding of frieze, Erechtheion. Stuart and Revett, I, 
Ch. 2, Pl. 8 

Dentils from Priene. eee Fig, 285 

Dentils and inter-dentils, Priene. Priene, Fig. 76. 

Dentils from the Temple of oe near Miletos. Haussoul- 
lier, Pl. 10 ; ; ? , 

Cornice soffit from Buldadros. "Ciena et Defrasse, 58 

Cornice from the Treasury of Gela, Olympia. Olympia, I, 
Taf. 117 ‘ ‘ : : 

Cornice crown from the Par enon Fenger, Taf. 2 

Cornice crown from the Erechtheion. Stuart and Revett, IT, 
Ch. 2, Pl. 8 


400 


FIG. 
292. 
293. 
294. 


295. 


- 296. 


297. 
298. 
299. 
300. 
301. 
302. 
303. 
304. 
305. 


306. 
307. 


308. 


309. 
o10. 


311. 
312. 
313. 
314. 
316. 
316. 
ests 


318. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


Ceiling cofferings from the Parthenon. Penrose, Pl. 15 . 

Acroterion from the Heraion, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 115 

Acroterion from the Temple of Aphaia, Aegina. Furt- 
wangler, Taf. 49 ; : ; : - 2 : 

Antefix from the Parthenon. Fox collection of photographs . 

Sima of the old Temple of Athena, Athens. Wiegand, Taf. 9 

Sima and cornice from Temple F, Selinous. Palermo Museum. 
Photograph by A. M. : : : , 

Sima-from Epidauros. Fox collection of photographs 

Sima from the Propylaia, Athens. Penrose, Pl. 31 

Sima from Temple of Zeus, Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 15 

Sima from Olympia. Olympia, I, Taf. 118, 2 

Sima from Priene. A.M. photograph . 

Composition of stylobate and pavement blocks in the Terns 
of Concordia, Akragas. Koldewey und Puchstein, Taf. 25. 

Front and lateral pavement of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia. 
Olympia, I, Taf.9 . : : Ss : : 

Corner blocks of the Arsenal at the Peirnieue Choisy, Etudes, 
Pl. : ; ‘ , ; 

Notched corner nines froin Berane Pergamon, Il, Taf. 38 

Relation of the pronaos and peripteros columns in the Parthe- 
non. Penrose, Pl. 3 

Complex pilasters from the Stadion Gate, ‘Olpareiat olympia, 
I, Taf. 48 

Complex pilasters from Rangovae Toxics pete. Pl. 66 

Blind arcade from the Stoa of Eumenes, Athens. Ath. Mitt., 
TT (1878), *Patots 


PAGE 
235 
238 


239 


241 | 


242 


242 
243 
248 


244 


244 
245 


247 


248 


249 


250 
251 


252 


Nigel 


254 


Relation of frontal to lateral clans in the Teele of Apolo, 


Corinth. Ath. Mitt., XI (1886), Taf. 7 
Corner pier from Magnesia. Magnesia, Fig. 126, ait Tat. 3. 
Plan of Ionic corner capital. Mauch, Taf. 21. 
Inner view of Ionic corner capital. Priene, Fig. 62 
Plan of corner epistyle blocks from the me at hee. 
Pergamon, I, Taf. 29 . i : 
Plan of corner epistyle blocks from Temple R, “ Selincnil Hit- 
torff et Zanth, Pl. 48 ‘ : 
Relation of epistyle to shaft in Temple C, Salton Hittorff 
et Zanth, Pl. 24 
Relation of epistyle to shaft in ae Temals of ‘Aphis! Ane 
Furtwingler, Taf. 38 : : ’ ‘ : 


257 
258 
261 


261. 


262 


262 


» 263 


263 


: 
3 
4 
. 
4 - 
3 
4 
; . 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


. Inward inclination of the entablature, Parthenon. Penrose, 


A BEM 


. Outward lean of he Spiele! Petroraia: Pataca Bohn, 


fit Soe bee 


. Corner regulae of the Par tienen. Penrose, Pl. 1 
. Corner regulae of the North Stoa, Priene. Priene, Fig. 190 
. Corner triglyph from cin Treasury of Selinous, Olympia. 


Olympia, I, Taf. 33, 


. Corner triglyph ee the Peaetey of Mexern: Ormnpins 


Olympia, I, Taf. 38 


. Corner dentils from Priene viewed fra Below: Prbusl 144 . 
. Corner dentils from Priene ; front view. Priene, 145 
. Twin dentils from the lea Temple at Pergamon. es 


IV, Taf. 38 


. Corner of the gable of the: megaron of Teter, near Salone, 


Koldewey und Puchstein, Fig. 62 . 


. Corner of gable of Temple C, Selinous. roue und Puch- 


stein, Fig. 78. 


. Corner of the gable of the ropulain: i heng MPenrben, Plat 
. Overhang of gable on the Temple of Zeus, Olympia. Olympia, 


III, Fig. 166 . 


. Plan of ceiling beams of the Theseton: Reinhardt, Taf. 1 
. Plan of ceiling beams of iad and front porch of the Par- 


thenon. Penrose, PI. 


. Plan of ceiling beams te the Tomnls ‘of A teen: Pelone, 


Priene, Taf. 8, 9 


. Doric order of the Parthenon. Photograph by Sebah 
. Ionic order of the Mausoleion at Halikarnassos. From a cast 


by Brucciani . 


. Paved road at Troy. Geran Taeenite snoteeaen 
. Street with colonnades at Palmyra. Photograph by H. C. 


Butler 


. Tower at Messene. German Institute photograph . 

. Gate D at Mantineia. Frazer, Paus., IV, 203, Fig. 26 

. The Arcadian Gate, Messene. Frazer, Paus., III, 450, Fig. 53 
. Propylaia at Tiryns. Schliemann, Tiryns, Fig. 125 

. Propylaia at Athens. Doerpfeld in Ath. Mitt., X (1885), 


Taf. 2 


. Fountain at Piphaios: Photograph by A. M. . : 
. Altar from Pergamon, restored. Berlin Museum photograph . 


2D 


401 
PAGE 
264 
264 
265 
265 
267 
268 


270 
271 


376. 
377. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


PAGE 

. Plan of the Temple of Themis, Rhamnous. Frazer, Paus., I, 
452, Fig. 39 : ae ; ; : . d0l 
. Plan of cella of Temple C, "Batnouae: Hittorff et Zanth, Pl. 21 303 

. Plan of the Temple of Apollo, Neandreia. Koldewey in 
Winckelmannsprogramme, 51 (1891), 24 ; ‘ . 303 
. Plan of the Parthenon. Ath. Miit., VI (1881), Taf. 12 . . 804 

. Plan of the Old Temple of Athena, Athens. Ath. Mitt., XXIX 
(1904), Taf. 6 : : ‘ . ? . 806 
. Plan of the Tholos at Unidanros. Cavvadias, Pl. 1. ‘ 307 

. Plan of the Temple of Artemis, Eleusis. Baumeister, I, s.v. 
Baukunst, 257, Fig. 248 , ; ; . 809 

. Plan of the Temple of Empedocles, Salinige Baumeister, I, 
s.v. Baukunst, 257, Fig. 244 . ; , : ‘ 310 
. Plan of the Temple of Zeus, Olympia. Oued I, Taf. 9 311 
. Plan of the Temple of Artemis, Magnesia. Magnesia, Fig. 30 312 
. Bouleuterion at Priene. Photograph by A. M. ; . 315 
. Plan of the Bouleuterion at Priene. Priene, Fig. 211 316 
. Plan of the Prytaneion at Priene. Priene, Fig. 225 317 
. Plan of the Agora at Magnesia. Magnesia, Taf. II 820 

. Stoa of Eumenes, Pergamon. Restoration. Berlin Museum 
photograph : : : ; 321 
. Plan of double Stoa, Mahon) Magnesia, Fig. 117 322 
. Plan of Palaistra at Olympia. Olympia, II, Taf. 73 324 
. Water troughsin the Gymnasium, Priene. Photograph by A.M. 326 
. Plan of Bath at Oiniadai. A.J.A., VIII (1904), 217 . 827 
. Plan of small Bath at Pompeii. Mau, Fig. 86 - . 829 
. The Stadion, Delphi. Photograph by Miss K. Gaskell 330 
. The starting line of the Stadion, Olympia. Olympia,1,Taf.47 331 
. Plan of a Hippodrome. Guhl und Koner, Fig. 271. 333 
. Plan of Library at Pergamon. Pergamon, II, Taf. 40 335 
. Book shelves at Pergamon, Restoration. Pergamon, I, 70 336 
. Plan of the Lesche of the Knidians, Delphi. Homolle, II, Pl.6 337 
. Plan of Theatre at Thorikos. Doerpfeld und Reisch, Fig. 438. 338 
. Theatre at Epidauros. German Institute photograph- . 340 

. Plan of the Theatre at Epidauros. Doerpfeld und Reisch, 
Fig. 50 . i ‘ . 842 

. Front seats in the Theatre of Disnvean Atlan Fox collec- 
tion of photographs : ; 3438 
Benches of the Theatre at Epnigaree Cayonitae P22, 344 
Benches of the Theatre at Miletos. Photograph by A, M. 345 


oe 

- 

2 

j 

5 
A 
a 
3 

' 


FIG. 
378. 
379. 


380. 


381. 
382. 
385. 
384. 
385. 
386. 
387. 


388. 
389. 


390. 


ool. 
392. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 403 


PAGE 
Parodos of Theatre at Priene. Photograph by A. M. . . 3847 
Plan of the Theatre at Termessos. Ath. Mitt., XXII one 
Taf. 10 . : ; 348 
Plan of Roman Theatre maeendine o Vinwnns: Ath. Mite., 
XXII (1897), 452 . A ; ; : , : . 349 


Skene of the Theatre at ehcians Lanckoronski, I, Taf. 27 351 
Skene of the Theatre at Eretria. A.J.A., VII (1891), Pl.11. 3538 


Skene of the Theatre at Magnesia. Puchstein, 61, Fig. 14 . 354 
Plan of the Palace at Tiryns. Schuchhardt, 132. . 9354, 355 
House No. XXIV at Priene. Priene, Fig. 301 ; ; . 3d9 
The Palace at Arne. B.C.H., XVIII (1894), Pl. 11 ; . 360 
House on ae Street to the Theatre, Delos. B.C.H., XIX 
(1895), Pl. t, ‘ : ; . 3861 
House of the Vettil Phatorank a ae ‘ : . 862 
Warship from a Greek vase in the British Museum. Toor 
PISasNOL AT .. , : . 363 
Interior of Tomb at ee pearas: Gheanan Teepe 
photograph . A , ‘ : : : rane i 


Doorway of a Tomb at Peas: Pieuzey. Mont Olympe, Pl. 2. 378 
Mausoleion at Halikarnassos. Restoration by W. B. Dins- 
moor, A.J.A., XII (1908), Pl 5 . : : , : . 374 


INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 


&Bak, 73, 98. 
ayxwv, 176. 
ayKaves, 25. 
ayopa, 318. 
ddutov, 302. 
duéria, 124. 

det os, 54, 121. 
dérwua, 54, 121. 
Aiyirruos, 358. 
axpoyelovov, 112. 
axpomods, 285. 
dxpooTodoy, 364, 


dxpwrnpia, 125, 239, 


dupoxovla, 34. 
duprOdrapo, 359. 
dup.ibéat pov, 331. 
dudirpoatundos, 310. 
avabUpwous, 37. 
dvaroyla, 145, 
avdpwv, 359. 
dvipwviris, 359. 
dvbeuwrol, 240. 
avrlénua, 51, 106. 
dfoves, 45. 
dmvovres, 14, 37. 
aroduThpiov, 325, 
am éfeots, 90. 
aTroOjRKal, 35d. 
adropuyn, 90. 
amédgpvuots, 90. 
darepos, 307. 
dpaidoTundos, 132, 


apuol, 14, 37. 
daorpayanos, 90, 150. 
drXavres, 86, 193. 
ath}, 355. 

avdol, 296. 

ddecis, ddl. 


ddracror, 364. 


BdOpa, 61, 315, 
Badaveta, 326. 
Bdaoes, 37, 80. 
Bacidewos, 353. 
Bacpucato., 56. 
Bnnos, 43. 

Bhua, 315, 346, 
BiBdw0bAKar, 335, 
BiBrXlwv, 335. 
BdATpa, 5. 
BovXevrjpiov, 315, 
Bwuds, 298, 300. 


yetoa, 124. 
yeronmodes, 113, 114. 
yevolrodes, 52. 
yetcov, 51, 112. 
youdou, 104. 
Topyévea, 176, 
yupvao.ov, 328. 
yuvatkwviris, 359, 
ywriata, 207. 
ywviator, 249. 


405 


406 


déuata, 5. 
de~aueval, 296. 


deopds, 95, 208. 


devrepa, 361. 


INDEX OF GREEK WORDS _ 


didfwua, 50, 108, 315. 


diafwpara, 541. 
dudorudos, 132, 


didrouxou, 42. 
diarovkdy, 42. 


didacKkanretov, 334. 


Siepelopara, 7. 
dijpns, 365. 


SuxacTHpia, 318. 


Sixdldes, 45. 
Slodo, 291. 
dlodos, 341. 
diumdH, 325. 
dimdovs, 305. 
dimrepos, 311. 
dimvdov, 293. 
dlioreyos, 322. 
Siotixos, 322. 


dit plyAvdos, 268. 


doxol, 7, 117. 
dopol, 31. 
ddéuos, 357. 
Spduos, 370. 
Sdpua, 357. 


éyxapra, 197. 


éyxoihia, 361. 
édagn, 19, 41. 
@50s, 502. 
€dpar, 344. 
3wria, $44. 
elcodos, 339. 


exxAnovasThpto v, 314, 


éxvirpwors, 24. 


éXavodéoov, 325, 


eémoNs, 292. 


| €uBdrns, 143. , 


émixpaviris, 43, 67. 


ZuBoror, 332, 364. — 
éumdexTov, 42. 
éumédua, 34. 
évadrdé, 15. 
évderuor, 16. 
évdoxeta, 296. 
éyracis, 73, 88. 
é&€dpa, 394. 
érddées, 291, 
ériBdbpa, 292. 
ériBdnrot, 7. 
ériBodn,- 102. 
ér Oar pov, 341, 


émlkpavoyv, 43, 47, 91. — 
émickyviov, 350. 
émismacThpes, 45. 
émiaTUduoy, 8, 102. 
érwpopia, 53, 121. 
érwrldes, 364. 
épyacta, 26. 
épuma, 302. 
éptuara, 366. 
éoria, 298. - 
écxdpa, 298. 
EvBotkés, 23. Pie 
evOuyrnpla, 42, 56, 67. 
eVoTunos, 132. ae 


épnBetov, 325. 


tuvya, 45, 363. 
taévn, 108, 95, 203. 
twoddpos, 108. 
fworthpes, 361. 
fwpdpos, 108. 


HAO, 104. 


Oarpol, 45. 
Oaxor, 315, he 


INDEX OF 


Oarapnyds, 237, 

Od rapor, 359. 
Oddapos, 802. 
déarpov, 330, 337, 339, 355. 
Bewédua, 40, 55. 
Gepud, 327. 
@ncavpds, 303. 
Adro, 306. 

6ddos, 371. 

Opavo., 16. 

OpvyKkds, 108, 369. 
Opiyx ds, 108. 

Opdva, 344. 

Oupéry, 300, 307. 
Avpa, 353. 

Ovpar, 45, 353. 
Ovperpa, 45. 

Oupldes, 43, 78, 291. 
Oupamuara, 43, 76. 


iepal, 287. 

tepds, 309. 

ixpia, 344. 
ixkpwwrfpes, 7. 
iuavres, 11. 
immddpouos, 332. 
icddouos, 31. 

ix Odmpwpos, 364. 


KayKedrdo, 39. 
kadiddes, 306. 
KadUpuara, 11. 
Kadupparia, 118. 
KadumrThpes, 121, 240. 
KauTTHp, 330. 
Kkavnpopo, 86, 192. 
xavoves, 104, 
kamnveia, 324. 
Kapuatides, 86. 
katrayeicor, 114. 


GREEK WORDS 


Kkaraywy.a, 324. 
karaéria, 124. 
katavTikpt, 361, 
KaTappaxtys, 294, 
KaTw dpopal, 7. 
kavAlov, 46, 8d. 
képapos, 17. 
kepkloes, 343. 
Kepadaioy, 91. 
kepann, 47. 
KepaNis, 91. 
KuykAldes, 39. 
kiykXls, 302. 
kioxpavov, 47, 91. 
kloves, 370. 

klwy, 46. 

kNetdes, 45, 

kre Tol, 366. 
KAnOpa, 45. 
kriuaxes, 300, 341, 343. 
kXuvorrodes, 118. 
kowNov, 339, 

kovla, 20. 

koviaua, 20. 
KovoTHplov, 325. 
koviotpa, 325, 337. 
kopar, 86, 163, 192. 
Képaxes, 45, 292. 
Kopivétos, 358. 
Kopoat, 173. 
Kopupaiov, 11. 
Kopwrn, 45. 

Koauos, 151, 2386. 
Kkoopopéopos, 108, 
Kpjvar, 297. 
kpntldwua, 40, 56. 
kpnmdatov, 40, 56. 
kpnls, 40, 56, 300, 308, 369. 
KpuTTH, 309. 
Kuiixnvds, 358. 


407 


408 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 


KUpaTLoV, Td. 
xuvoxépado, 245, 


Kk@uat, 285. 


AdKKot, 296. 
hadpar, 359. 
heovroxéparar, 176. 


NeovToképarot, 123, 245, 


Aéoxn, 306. 
Aevkds, 22. 
AcBuxés, 24. 


NlOor, 27, 28, 42, 56, 249. 


ALOdKoAAa, 3B4.. 


Nibos, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30, 31, 32. 


NObcTpwra, 41. 
Auméves, 366. 
hoydades, 27. 


hoyetov, 315, 846, 353. 


NouTpa, 327. 


ovTpwr, 525. 


patavdpos, 151, 236. 
pdvdaro, 40. 

péyas, 304. 

péoat, 343. 
pécavrot, 360. 

péon, 349. 

pecouvat, 11. 
pecortpyia, 290, 292. 
pecorknviorv, 349. 
petamvpyia, 292. 
perorat, 50. 
pérwtroy, 45. 

pcos, 14. 

pnpolt, 110, 188, 225. 
podvBdoxota, 34. 
povorrrepos, 307. 
povocreyos, 322. 
povdrTixos, O21. 
povotpty\udos, 268. 


Mouceiov, 354. 


pox ol, 45. 


vatoxos, 302. 

vads, 171, 300, 302, 305, 506, 309, 
310. 

vaurrnyia, 368. 

vads, 237, 361. 

vews, 300. 

vewao.kot, 866. 

wyooa, 33%. 


tévwv, 359. 
Eviwpopar, 12. 


6d0l, 287. 
olkjmata, 306, 332. 
olxld.ov, 802. 

oikot, 359. 

otkos, 300, 309, 334, 357, 358., 
6dxol, 341. 
6\ploKot, 45. 

émal, 45. 

drug Obdou0s, 301. 
émricbocKkjviov, 352. 
érrH, 16. 
6pbocrarns, 42. 
épopal, 117. 

dpopy, 121. 
dpopixds, 151, 236. 
éptrypata, 296. 
épxhoTpa, 337. 
ovdol, 7. 

ovdds, 40. 
ovpavicxos, 118, 236. 
ovpavos, 118, 236. 
obs, 176. 

dpbarpol, 364. 


madaloTpa, 325. 
mavooketa, 324. 


INDEX OF 


mapanoyeta, 304. 
Tapamréracpa, 302. 
mapacKkyvia, 352. 
mapacrddes, 43, 69, 309. 


mapacrdo.v, 171, 308, 309. 


wapdotacis, 292. 
twapeterpeciar, 366. 
mapodot, 315, 346. 
mwapodos, 366. 
mapwris, 176. 
meNextvo., 5. 
mwevTaddwpos, 14. 
mevTnKovTopos, 305. 
mepiBpodos, 290. 
mwepldpomos, 292. 
meptdoyeiov, 304. 
mepiodos, 292. 
mepimaros, 334. 
mwepiarepos, 397, 310. 
mepla tudor, 356. 
mweplatudos, 300, 310, 356. 
mwepiTévera, 30. 
mepiTouts, 6. 
mepipeph, 306. 
mnnos, 34, 

mivaxes, 7, 118, 552. 
mralora, 117. 
mwaTetar, 286. 


mrivos, 13, 16, 48, 80, 98. 


todo, 34. 

modvywvos, 28. 
mpodouos, 300, 301, 358. 
mpoédpa, 344. 
mpoeuBdr.ov, 364. 
zpo0upa, 294, 325, 357. 
mpodva.s, 300. 

mpovaos, 300, 301. 
moomvAata, 294. 
TpotkHvov, 3d2. 
mpocTtaces, 308. 


GREEK WORDS 


mpocTuros, 309. 
mpooT@or, 301, 
TpooT@yw, 301. 
mpotouai, 102. 
mpoppayuara, 357. 
mpuTavetov, 317. 
arépuvyes, 121. 
mrepuywov, 121. 
mukvogTudos, 132. 


mda, 45, 290, 293. 


muNlées, 290. 
muda@ves, 292. 
mudwpia, 325, 
mupa, 298. 
mupyo., 290, 292. 
mwp.vos, 21. 
mw@pos, 21. 


padBdwors, 185, 187. 
‘Podstaxdy, 356. 
pomrpa, 45. 
pvduots, 157. 
payes, 359. 


cauBvKn, 292. 
cavides, 7, 45. 
cedides, 117. 
onkes, 302. 

gual, 122. 
oKxevobAKat, 368. 
oxnvy, 346, 349. 
oxqmrpa, 45. 
oxids, 318. 
oxotia, 83. 
ometpar, 80. 
oTdd.ov, 330. 
orabpol, 7, 43, 76. 
oreyaoThpes, 121. 
oréyn, 53, 121. 
oretpa, 364, 


409 


410 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 


orepeoBarat, 55. 
oTepeoBarns, 40. 
oTHAn, 368. 

orod, 321, 322, 328. 
oroal, 304. 

otdéusov, 370. 
arotxyo, 14, 865. 
oTpogets, 45. 
oTpoguyyes, 7, 45. 
oTpwpara, 19, 41, 286. 
oTpwuaroBarat, 61. 
oTpwuatoBarns, 40. 
oTpwrhpes, 117. 
oTvdA\oBaTat, 5d. 
aTvdoBarns, 40. 
orvdorivaxia, 190, 
oTvnos, 45. 
otvbects, 26. 
cvvvouo., 28. 
ovpryyes, 296. 
ovoTunos, 132. 
opevddrn, 331. 
oonkicxo, 7, 11. 
opnvoedys, 32. 
opovdvro., 47. 
owdHves, 121. 
c@ua, 46, 72, 85. 


traivla, 104. 
Tapuetov, SOL, 
TavpoxoAna, 6. 
tapos, 294. 
teixy, 41. 
TerxoBaTat, 56. 
reixos, 290. 
Tedapna@ves, 86, 193. 
réuevos, 313. 
Téppa, 3ol. 
TegoapakovTnpns, 365. 
Trerpaywva, 117. 


Terpdywvor, 325. 
TeTpaywvos, 30, 80. 
TeTpddwpos, 14. 
TeTpakiovioy, 302, 
TeTpacToo, 356. 
TorxoBarat, 56. 
To.xoBarns, 40. 
rotxo, 41, 42, 361. 
Tpateta, 346. 
Tpaxnrov, 91. 
Tpaxnros, 91. 
TpiBacpuos, 57. 
Tplyr\vgot, 50. 
tptydvgor, 108, 109. 
tply\vgos, 108, 267. 
Tprywvos, 157. 
Tpinpys, 365. 
TpiTdovs, 806. 
tplrudov, 293. 
tplareyo., 359. 
Tpomis, 361. 
Tpoxéror, 80. 
Tpoxtros, 83. 
TUurava, 45. 
TUumavov, 124, 


vdpaywyeta, 296. 
vdpoppba, 123. 
bérpwpos, 364. 
vralOp.os, 313. 
vratOpos, 313. 
brépbupa, 7, 77. 
UrepOvpioy, 43. 
vreprévaa, 7. 
vrepTévaory, 48, 
Urep@ot, 304. 
dreppor, 359, 
brevOurTnpla, 40. 
UmroBar pes, 56. 
vrodopual, 40. 


trodoxal, 296. 
vrofwuara, 368. 
vrddnua, 11. 
Yrévomar, 296. 
vrockyviov, 300. 
vmotévaia, 7. 
bmorévatoy, 45. 


broTtpaxnrov, 73, 91. 


vrdrpoxo, 292. 
dmwpdpiov, 35d. 


papos, 367. 
garvéuara, 117. 
gral, 43. 
gopnrol, 292. 
gpopunddr, 14. 
ppayyol, 39. 
ppeatias, 296. 


INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 411 


ppovpia, 291. 
‘| Ppvy.os, 24. 


xapak, 294. 

xéAvo pa, 361. 
xerwnov, 6. 

xnrn, 366. 

Xios, 23. 

xon, 40, 55. 
xpnopoypadlor, 302. 
xo@pa, 294, 366, 369. 


Pevdicddopos, 51. 
Wevdodlrrepos, 311. 
Wevdoreplrrepos, S11. 


@édeiov, 355. 
oun, 13. 
ra, 25. 


GENERAL INDEX 


Abacus, 98-100, 134, 214-217. 

Abaton, 79. 

Abdera, 312-313. 

Acacia, 3. 

Academy, 334. 

Acanthus, leaf, 158; scrolls, 243, 245: 
see Ornament. 

Acropolis, 285: see Athens. 

Acroteria, 54, 124-125, 238-240, 279- 
280. 

Adze,;4. 

Aedicula, 310. 

Aegae, 173, 323. 

Aegina. Temple of Aphaia: acroteria, 
163, 240; annuli, 191, 207; echinus, 


97,134; anta capitals, 178; platband 


decoration, 171; sima, 245; relation 
of cornice to frieze, 138; composi- 
tion of colonnade, 263; gable decora- 
tion, 237; aisles, 304; galleries, 304. 
Tomb of Phokos in, 369. 

Africa, cisterns, 297; 
tombs, 372. 

Agamedes, 6. 

Agora, 318-320. 

Air spaces, 8. 

Aischines, 213. 

Aischylos, 157. 

Aizanoi. Temple of Zeus: decoration 
of channellings, 186; of epistyle, 
218; of frieze, 226; close relation of 
anta and column capitals, 76; string 


Hellenistic 


courses, 171; consoles, 233. The- 
atre, 194. 

Akarnanian, 327. 

Akragas. Temple of Concordia: tri- 


glyphs, 50; slope of gable, 139; 
composition of stylobate, 246-247; 
vertical columns, 260; relation of 


entablature to intercolumniation, 
256; windows to light roof, 79, 313. 
Olympieion: Atlantes, 86, 163, 193; 
base of, 59; relation of entablature 
to intercolumniation, 256; pseudo- 
peripteral porch, 311. Altar of Zeus, 
pavement foundations, 61. Tomb 
of Theron: curvature of podium, 61; 
polytriglyphal frieze, 269; mixed 
styles in, 284. 
Akrostolion, 364. 


Alder, 3. 
Alexander, 365. 
Alexandria. Town of, 286; houses, 


359; lighthouse, 367; University to 
the Muses, 334; marble wall revet- 
ments, 168. 

Alexandria Troas, 328. 

Alexandrinum, 41. 

Algeria, 7. 

Alinda, 323. 

Altars, 298, 300. 

Amphiprostyle, 310. 

Amphithalamoi, 359. 

Amphitheatron, 331. 

Ancyra, 179-181. 

Andros, 78, 291. 

Animals, 163. 

Annuli, 207-209. 

Anointing room, 325. 

Anta, 69-76; complex types, 252; dec- 
oration of, 176-179. 

Antefixes, 122, 240, 277-278. 

Anthemia, 227, 240. 

Antbropomorphic, 79, 163, 192-193. 

Antioch, 286-287, 291. 

Antiphellos, 174, 269. 

Antithema, of epistyle, 220-221; of 
frieze, 106-107, 111. 


413 


414 GENERAL INDEX 


Aphaia, Temple of: see Aegina. 
Aphesis, 331-334. 


Aphrodisias. Temple of Aphrodite, 218. 


Agora, 319. Stadion, 331. 
Apollo, 222: see Corinth, Delos, 


Delphi, Metapontum, Miletos, Nean- 


dreia, Phigaleia, Troad. 

Apollonion, 81. 

Apophyge, 90. 

Apothesis, 90. 

Aqueducts, 296. 

Araiostyle, 132. 

Arcade, 255. 

Archimedes, 201. 

Argos. Temple of Hera, 13, 56, 301. 
Theatre, 341, 344. Tower, 291. 
Double temple near, 305. 

Aristandrian, 323. 

Aristotle, 187, 335. 

Arne, 359. 

Arsenal, 8, 368. 

Artemis, Temple of: see Ephesos, 
Magnesia. 

Ash, 3. 

Asia Minor, 2, 8, 173, 182, 236, 282-283, 
344. 

Asklepieion: see Epidauros, Priene, 
Aspendos, 346, 354. 

Assos, 78, 81, 222, 289. 

Astragal, 90. 

Assyrian, 195, 199, 286, 355. 

Astronomical, 314. 

Athena, Temple of: see Athens, Per- 
gamon, Priene, Sonnion. 

Athens. Town of, 285, 289, 291. Acrop- 
olis architectural fragments, 74, 93, 
95, 134, 149, 159, 160, 163, 169, 187, 
196, 200, 202, 206, 213, 237, 265. 
Agora, 208, 257. House of Kallias, 
361. Pinakotheke, 171, 176. Propy- 
laia, 8, 64, 74, 84, 89, 99, 165, 169, 
174, 191, 197, 202, 236, 243-244, 252, 
259, 264, 269, 283, 295. Monument of 
Lysicrates, 59, 63, 85, 100, 122, 166, 


nes, 254, 255, 286. Stoa of Hadrian, 
111, 335. Theatre of Dionysos, 97, 
156, 193, 338, 341, 344, 346. Temple 
of Athena Nike: its plan, 310, 312; 
columns and piers, 71, 79, 84, 86, 
88, 133, 197, 200; antae, 176, 178; 
entablature, 137, 172, 266; mould- 
ings, 68, 170, 237. Old Temple of 
Athena: its plan, 305; entablature, 
104, 272; decoration, 153, 163, 224, 
230, 232, 242. Erechtheion: its plan, aap 
169, 305, 308; walls, doors, and win- . 
dows, 69, 79, 174, 176, 253, 254; col- i. 
umns and Caryatids, 86, 92, 99, 182, 
186, 193, 199, 200-203, 219, 259, 260; 
antae, 71-72, 170, 177, 178; entabla- 
ture, 137, 189, 150, 170, 172, 230, 264, 
266; ceiling and roof, 12, 122, 140, 236, 
274; minor decoration, 153, 158, 159, 
160, 163, 194, 245; unity, 75. Olym- 
pieion, 97, 100, 107, 108, 311, 313. 
Parthenon: plan, 304, 305, 312, 313, 
base and pavement, 57, 58, 246, 248, 
249; walls, doors, and windows, 8, 
63, 64, 171, 175; antae, 74, 178, 252; . 
columns, 89, 97, 131, 133, 134, 185, a“ 
190, 191, 207, 251) - 256,256 2045 
entablature, 50, 51, 102, 106, 116, 131, © 
217, 218, 225, 230, 256, 263, 265, 266, 
269, 270; gable, ceiling, and roof, 53, 
118, 122, 139, 160, 236, 239, 240, 244, 
263, 273, 275, 277, 278. Tower of 
Winds, 63, 97, 98, 114, 120, 156, 188, 
208, 233, Tholos, 318. Walls, 292, 
Attalids, 119-120. 
Atreus: see Mycenae. 
Attic Ionic, 230. 
Augurs, 4. 
Augusteum, 179-181. 
Augustus, 336. 
Aures, 141-142. 
Axe, 4. 


Babylonian, 286. 


169, 188, 194, 212. Monument of | Balteus, 95. 

Philopappos, 177, 253. Monument | Base mouldings; see Columns, Founda- 
of Thrasyllos, 79, 86, 191, 266. Sta-| tions, Walls. 

dion, 330, 331. Stoa Basileios, 323. | Bases, of buildings, 39-41, 55-61, 165- 
Stoa of Attalos, 184. Stoa of Eume-| 166, 246; of walls, 56, 67, 168-171; 


GENERAL INDEX 


of antae, 69-72, 177, 252; of columns, 
46, 79-85, 185, 181-183, 260; of stat- 
ues, 61. 

Basilica, 323. 

Bassae: see Phigaleia. 

Baths, 326-329. 

Battlements, 291, 292. 

Bead and reel, 150. 

Beak moulding, 233, 237. 

Beams, 3, 12. 

Bed moulding, 280. 

Benches, 344. 

Benihassan, 187. 

Berlin, 101. 

Bin-Bir-Direk, 297. 

Bireme, 365. 

Blue, 148, 218, 225, 233. 

Bliimner, 2. 

Boards, 7. 

Body: see Columns, Shaft. 

Boetticher, 236. 

Bolts, 176. 

Bolymnos, 86. 

Bonding, 15, 18, 34. 

Bouleuterion, 315-317: see Daulis, Mi- 
letos, Olympia, Priene, Teos, Ter- 
messos. 

Boxwood, 3. 

Braces, 19. 

Braid, 153-154. 

Breakwater, 366. 

Bricks, 12-17. 

Bridges, 289. 

British Museum, 259. 

Buerania, 163, 224. 

Buildings, commercial, 318-324; do- 
mestic, 355-361; governmental, 314—- 
318; for intellectual and social pur- 
poses, 334-355; for physical culture, 
324-334; religious, 297-314; sepul- 
chral, 368-375. 


Cadacchio, 209. 

Caligula, 240. 

Candia, 169. 

Capitals, of antae, 73-76, 178-181, 252; 
of columns, 47-48, 91-102, 133-185, 
193-217, 260-261, 280, 282; of walls, 
67-69, 171-172. 


415 


Carpenter, 4. 

Castor and Pollux, 116. 

Cauliculi, 212. 

Cedar, 3, 12. 

Ceilings, construction of, 12, 19, 53; 
horizontal and vaulted, 117-120; 
decoration of, 234-237; composition 
of, 274-275. 

Censorinus, 142. 

Central Baths, 328. 

Chalk line, 4. 

Chamber tombs, 370. 

Channellings, 48, 181, 183-188, 190- 
191. 

Chapels, 306. 

Chestnuts, 3. 

Chisels, 4. 

Choisy, 2, 259. 

Cisterns, 296, 297. 

Clamping, 5. 

Clamps, 34, 35. 

Clay, 7, 13. 

Clubhouse, 336. 

Codex, 332. 

Cofferings, 12, 53, 117-120, 234-237. 

Colchian, 120. 

Colchis, 10, 11. 

Colonnades, 255-260, 302, 304, 307, 
356, 368. 

Color, 147-148. 

Columns, construction of, 8, 11, 19, 46, 
47; forms of, 69, 101; proportions, 
133; bases, 8, 80-85; shafts, 48, 86- 
88, 181, 184-191; capitals, 5, 47-48, 
91-102, 193-217; composition of, 250, 
255-261. 

Commercial buildings, 318-324. 

Commons room, 325. 

Compactiles trabes, 8. 

Composition: see Chapter V. 

Concord, Temple of, 117. 

Concordia, Temple of: see Akragas. 

Concrete, 19. 

Console, 114, 176, 233. 

Construction: see Chapter I. 

Corcyraean colonnade, 323. 

Cords, 5. 

Cori, Temple of Herakles, 103, 138, 
254. ' 


416 ; GENERAL INDEX 


Corinth. Town, 285, 287, 291; cir-| Demeter, Temple of: see Eleusis, 


cular building, 306; fountain of 
Peirene, 297; wall decorated with 
triglyphs, 270; harbor, 367. Temple 
of Apollo: its base, 58; columns, 89, 
97, 133, 134, 136, 191; entablature, 
48, 116, 181, 1388; composition, 256. 

Corinthian house, 358. 

Cornice, construction of, 20, 21, 51- 
53; forms of, 111-116, 124, 268; 
decoration of, 230-234, 240-241 ; 245; 
composition of, 264-265, 272, 273: 
see Entablature. 

Corridors, 359-360. 

Courtyard, 355-357. 

Cover tiles, 240. 

Crete, 254: see Knossos, Phaistos. 

Cross-beams, 12. 

Crowning moulding: see Moulding. 

Crypts, 306. 

Curtius, 323. 

Curvature: see detail concerned. 

Cyma, Lesbian, 157; reversa, 237, 245. 

Cypress, 3. 

Cyprus, 100. 

Cyrene, 287. 


Dart and egg: see Egg and dart. 

Date palm, 3. 

Daulis, 316. 

Decastyle, 313. 

Decoration: see Ornament. 

Deigma, 318. 

Deinokrates, 286. 

Delos. Archaic capitals, 93, 95, 196, 
200; shafts, 86, 184. Cave temple, 
301. Temple of Apollo, 184. 
Houses, 102, 168, 356, 357, 360. 
Storehouses, 318, 368. Macellum, 
102. Stoa, 226. Palaistra, 325. 
Theatre, 224, 341, 344, 350, 354. 

Delphi. Column of Naxians, 95, 203. 
Temple of Apollo, 28, 217. Temple 
of Athena Pronaia, 307. Treasuries, 
302. Treasury of Athenians, 222, 224. 
Treasury of Knidians, 100, 163, 192, 
193, 228-229, 232. Treasury of Pho- 
caeans, 170, 176. Treasury of Siph- 
nos, 192-193. Stadion, 330-331. 


Gaggera, Paestum. 

Demetrios Poliorketes, 292. 

Dentils, 10, 114, 139, 231, 270, 271. 

Despoina, Temple of, 58, 59. 

Diaper, 154-155. 

Diastyle, 132. 

Diazoma, 341, 346. 

Die, 59. 

Diglyph, 109. 

Dikasterion, 318. 

Diminution, 87, 136. 

Diocletian, 111, 329. 

Dionysos Bresaios, 83; Dionysos Eleu- 
thereus, 344. Temple of Dionysos: 
seePergamon. Theatre of Dionysos: 
see Athens. / 

Dipteral, 311. 

Disks, 239. | 

Distyle, 312. 

Ditryglyphal, 268. 

Dodecastyle, 313. 

Dog heads, 123. 

Dome, 120. 

Door-jambs, 76. 

Door post, 3. : 


Doors, materials of, 6, 7, 45; forms of, 


76-78; decoration of, 173-176. 
Doorways, 43-45, 253-254. 
Doric leaf pattern, 156. — 
Drawbridge, 292. 

Dressing room, 325. 

Drill, 4. 

Drums, 47. 

Drydocks, 367-368. 

Dusting room or konistra, 325. 
Dwellings for priests, 313. 
Dystos, 356- 


Eagle, as decoration, 163. 

Ears, in ships, 364. 

Earthworks, 290. 

Ebony, 3. 

Echinus, 47, 91-92. 

Egg and dart, 156, 202, 236, 244. 
Egyptian, 5, 195, 207, 310, 355, 364. 
Ekklesiasterion, 314, 315. 

Elaios, 77. 

Elder, 6. 


GENERAL INDEX 


Eleusis. Temple of Artemis, 312. Tem- 
ple of Demeter, 140. Propylaia, 226. 
Philon’s Porch, 318. Government 
buildings, 317. 

Elis, 323. 

Elm, 3, 6. 

Encaustic, 147. 

Enneastyle, 313. 

Enneastylos: see Paestum. 

Entablature, materials and construc- 
tion of, 8-10, 21, 48; decoration of, 
217; composition of, 262-272: see 
Cornice, Epistyle, Frieze. 

Entasis, 88-90, 136. 

Entrances to towns, 290. 

Epeion, 291. 

Ephebeion, 325. 

Ephesos. Town of, 285. Bath, 328. 
Colonnades, 287. Fountain, 297. Old 
Temple of Artemis, 82, 83, 185, 188, 
200-203, 216. Later Temple of Arte- 
mis, 7, 8, 151, 260. 

Ephoreion, 318. 

Epidauros. Abaton, 79, 86. Corin- 
thian capital, 97. Temple of Askle- 
pios, 232, 279. Tholos, 97, 110, 111, 
158, 159, 219, 224, 243, 274, 283, 307. 
Stadion, 331, 332. Theatre, 75, 79, 
94, 339, 341, 343, 344, 353. 

Epigone, 323. 

Epikranitis, 67. 

Episkenion, 350. 

Epistyle, materials and construction 
of, 8-9, 48-49; forms of, 102-107; 
decoration of, 217-221; proportion, 
137; composition of, 262-265: see 
Entablature. 

Epitheatron, 341, 343. 

Erechtheion: see Athens. 

Eretria. Baths, 328. Theatre, 339, 350. 

Etruria, 2. 

Etruscan, 8, 174, 240, 371. 

Euryalos, 291. 

Eustyle, 132. 

Euthydomos of Miletos, 368. 

Exedra, 297, 335. 


Feathers, 163. 
File, 4. 


417 


Fir, 3. 

Fletcher, Banister, 201. 

Floors, 6,.7, 19. 

Fortification: see Towns. 

Fortified harbors, 366. 

Forum, 186. 

Foundations, 6, 39-40, 55-62, 165. 

Fountains, 297. 

Frames, 12. 

Francois Vase, 80. 

Frieze, materials and construction of, 
49-51; forms of, 108-111; decoration 
of, 221-230; proportions of, 137; 
composition of, 256, 266-270; un- 
usual application of, 269, 270, 300. 

Furnace, 328. 


Gable, 237-239, 240, 264, 265. 

Gaggera, 115, 273, 300, 301. 

Galea a scaloccio, 366. 

Galea a zenzile, 366. 

Galleries, 304. 

Gates, 290-291. 

Gateways, 294, 295. 

Geison, 140. 

Gela, Treasury of: see Olympia. 

Geographical theory of orientation, 
314. 

Gimlets, 4. 

Girders, 7. 

Girdle, 95. 

Glue, 6. 

Gluing, 6. 

Gods and Giants, 224. 

Gorgon heads, 176, 221. 

Government buildings, 314-318. 

Graeco-Roman theatre, 348. 

Grain market, 323. 

Grape leaf, 157. 

Grappling hooks, 292. 

Greeks and Amazons, 224, 

Griffins, 163. 

Guilloche, 153. 

Guttae, 218. 

Gutters, 287. 

Gymnasium, 328, 334. 


Hadrian, Stoa of, 111, 335. 
Hagia Triada, 166, 195. 


418 GENERAL INDEX 


Halikarnassos. 
120, 166, 197, 216, 230, 375. Palace 
of Mausolos, 168, 173. x 

Hammer, 4. 

Handles, 45. 

Harbors, 366-368. 

Heads as antefixes, 240. 

Hearth, 317-318. 

Heliodorus Damianus, 89. 

Hellenistic buildings, 296, 314, 319, 
325, 327, 334; columns, 131, 184, 190, 
200; entablatures, 218, 219; orna- 
ment, 153, 158, 168, 176. 

Heptastyle, 313. 

Heraion: see Argos, Olympia, Samos. 

Herakleia, 292. 

Herakleion, 334. 

Herakles, 222, 224: see Cori. 

Hermogenes, 182, 311. 

Herodes Atticus, 297, 330. 

Hexastyle, 313, 356. 

Hinge posts, 7. 

Hippodamos, 285-286. 

Hippodrome, 3382-334. 

History of Plants, 2. 

Hittites, 195. 

Hospices, 313. 

Hotel, 324. 

Houses, 6-12, 355-361. 

Hydra, 237. 

Hypaethral, 313. 

Hyposkenion, 350. 

Hyrkanos, 357. 


Tassos, 168, 344. 
Iktinos, 84, 158. 
Ineantada, 192, 226. 
Inns, 324. 
Inscription, 2. 
Inter-dentil, 231. 
Ionian, 9, 319. 

Ionic style, 281-282. 
Italic house, 361. 
Italy, 131, 297, 372. 
Ivy leaf, 157. 


Jambs, 7, 76. 
Joists, 7. 
Juniper, 3. 


Mausoleion, 59, 99, | Kahun, 356, 360. 


Kallias, 361. 

Kangovar, 72, 252, 323. 
Keel, 361. 

Kenchreai, 370. 

Keos, 291. 

Keys, 45. 

Khan, 324. 

King post, 11. 

Kitchen, 357. 

Knidians, Treasury of: see Delphi. 
Knidos, 67, 120, 319, 373. 
Knockers, 45. 

Knossos, 168, 173, 227, 370. 
Koldewey und Puchstein, 126, 182, 250. 
Kolumdade, 82. 

Konistra, 325, 337. 

Kos, 297. 

Kosmophoros, 108, 114. 
Kourno, 309. 

Krepidoma, 40-41, 56-58. 
Kyniskos, 61. 

Kynosarges, 334, 
Kyzikene, 358. 

Kyzikos, 190. 


Labranda. Temple of Zeus, 111, 217, 
271. Tomb at, 372. 

Lacunariorum, 275. 

Laodikeia, 194, 331. 

Lapiths, 224. — 

Larymna, 367. 

Lateran, 332. 

Lathe, 47. 

Laurel leaf, 156. 

Law courts, 318. 

Lead, 296. 

Leaf and dart, 156. 

Leaf patterns, 156-158. 

Lechaion, 367. 

Lechat, 310. 

Leonidaion: see-Olympia. 

Lesbian, 157, 216. 

Lesbos, 83, 94, 196. 

Lesche, 336. 

Libraries, 335-336. 

Lighthouse, 367. 

Lindos, 366. 

Lintel, 43. 


; af 
ans ‘e a eee 
Oe ee 
we. ee.” a 


a ee ee ee 


# 
= 
> 
& 
a 
4 


GENERAL INDEX 


Lion heads, 123, 176, 241, 245. 
Lion Tomb, 373. 

Lloyd, 131. 

Locks, 45. 

Lockers, 328. 

Logeion, 346. 

Logs, 6. 

Lokroi, Temple at, 83, 91, 194, 203. 
Loopholes, 291, 292. 

Lotus, 161, 162, 227, 244. 

Lyceum, 334. 

Lycia, 2, 7, 10, 95, 174, 369. 
Lykosoura, 58, 59. 

Lysicrates, Monument of: see Athens. 


Maeander, 151. 

Magnesia. Agora,319. Temple of Ar- 
temis: its columns, 98, 135, 156, 182, 
194, 198, 200, 203, 213, 216, 260; en- 
tablature, 107, 137, 219, 220, 237, 
311. Temple of Zeus, 218. Pry- 
taneion, 318. Stoa, 322. Theatre, 
169, 354. 

Maidens, 240. 

Maison Carrée, 61. 

Mantineia, 6, 305, 318, 323. 

Marathon, 369. 

Marble, 22-24. 

Mars Ultor, 172. 

Masks, 240. % 

Masonry, 25-38. 

Materials, wood, 1-13; clay, concrete, 
and stucco, 13-21; stone and marble, 
21-38; metals, 38. 

Mausoleion: see Halikarnassos. 

Mausolos, 168, 175. 

Megalopolis. Government buildings, 
317. Colonnades, 322, 323. Theatre, 
316, 341, 344. 

Megara, 285, 297. 

Megara Hyblaea, 199. 

Megarians, Treasury of: see Olympia. 

Megaron, 300, 356-358. 

Mesauloi, 360. 

Mesoskenion, 349. 

Messa, 108. 

Messene, 78, 289, 290-291, 293-294, 
309. 

Metals, 38-39. 


419 


Metapontum, 8, 97, 1383, 263. Temple 
of Apollo, 109, 225. 

Metope, 50-51, 138, 221-224, 256, 267- 
269. 

Micon, 173. 

Mideia, 291. 

Miletos. Town of, 285. Temple of 
Apollo: its plan, 302, 309, 311, 313; 
columns, 81, 89, 95, 102, 133, 156, 
182-183, 201, 260-261; pilasters, 76, 
161, 168, 179; entablature, 107, 137, 
162, 219, 231. Bouleuterion, 315. 
Theatre, 178, 344. 

Mines, 290. 

Mitre, 6, 262. 

Mnesikles, 295. 

Moats, 290. 

Mole, 366. 

Monoglyph, 109. 

Monotriglyphal, 268. 

Mortar, 18, 34. 

Mortise, 6. 

Mosaic, 41, 167. 

Mouldings, 6, 19, 157; of capitals, 
93-94, 193, 197, 237; of entabla- 
tures, 230, 231, 244-245, 268; of 
gables, 237. 

Mounds, 294. 

Mourners, sarcophagus of, 372-373. 

Mummius, 224. 

Museum, 334. 

Mutule, 9-10, 53, 232-234, 272. 

Mycenae, town of, 285. Walls, 168, 
289. Gates, 77, 87. Palace, 153, 166, 
173. Tholoi, 87, 119-120. Tholos of 
Atreus, its columns, 91, 96, 176, 177, 
193, 205-206; facade, 150, 159, 168, 
217, 370. 

Mycenaean columns, 87, 195; gems, 
82, 83, 90, 187; ivories, 91, 193-194. 

Mylasa, 111, 120, 192, 276. 

Myra, 111, 218-219. 

Mythological, 237. 


Nailing, 5. 

Nails, 5. 

Naos, 302. 

Naples, 194. 
Naukratis, 81, 91, 194. 


420 GENERAL INDEX 


Neandreia. Temple of Apollo, 91, 94, 
100, 1384, 196, 200, 202, 303. 

Neck, 193. : 

Nemea. Temple of Zeus, 131, 133, 134, 
136, 139. 

Nereid Monument, 372. 

Nereids, 240. 

Nike, 240, 366; Temple of Athena 
Nike: see Athens. 

Nimes, 61, 311. 

Notching, 6, 250. 


Oak, 6. 

Oak leaf, 157. 

Octastyle, 313. 

Odéion, 355. 

Oemichen, 129. 

Oikos, 357-360. 

Oiniadai, 78. 

Oinomaos, 8. 

Olive, 157. 

Olympia. Acroterion, 279. Agora, 319. 
Altar, 270. Altis, 286. Antefixes, 240. 
Bases of statues, 61-62. Baths, 154. 
Bouleuterion, 63, 159, 244, 317. Cap- 
itals from, 178, 208, 214. Cornices, 
138, 156. Epistyle decoration, 217. 
Exedra, 297. Gymnasium, 98. He- 
raion, 8, 13, 57, 70, 121, 149, 239, 240, 
246. Leonidaion, 85, 98, 100, 165, 
185, 214, 216, 278. Maeanders, 151. 
Nero’s palace, 150, 154. Oinomaos’ 
house, 8. Palaistra, 95-96, 190, 196, 
200. Palmettes, 160. Philippeion, 
a, 63, 101, 103, 118, 149, 165-166, 198, 

212, 307. Prytaneion, 318. Pulvinus, 
904. Scrolls, 151, 153. Sima, 243- 
245. §. E. Binder. 156-157. Sta- 
dion, 72, 252, 323, 331-332. Taenia, 
105. Treasury of Gela, 115, 122, 149, 
151, 191, 232, 233, 243, 277. Treasury 
of ‘Megara, 68, 112, 184, 267, 272. 
Treasury of Sikyon, 151, 171. Treas- 
uries, 301-302; Walls, 66. Temple 
of Zeus: its acroteria, 240; antae, 
70, 71; columns, 256; cornice, 113, 
138; epikranitis, 68; epistyle, 106, 
262; frieze, 240; gables, 139, 239; 
gallery, 304; krepidoma, 57; met- 


opes, 224; pavements, 19, 167, 248; 
porches, 311-312; ramp, 56; sima, 
244, 277-278; tiles, 122; tympanon, 
373-874. 

Olympieion: see Akragas, Athens. 

Onasias, 301. 

Opisthodomos, 301-302. 

Opisthoskenion, 352. 

Opus Alexandrinum, 41. 

Opus tesselatum, 41. 

Orange, 118, 346. 

Orchestra, 337-339. 

Orchomenos in Arcadia, 185, 291. 

Orchomenos in Boeotia, 77, 147, 155, 
159. 

Orientation, 314. 

Ornamentation, methods of, 146-149; 
types of geometric, 149-155; floral, 
155-163 ; zoomorphic, 163; anthropo- 
morphic, 163-165; of foundations, 
pavements, and walls, 165-173; of 
doors, windows, antae, and pilasters, 
173-181; of columns, 181-217; of 
entablatures, 217-234; of ceilings 
and roof, 234-245. 

Oropos. Altar, 300. Temple of Amphi- 
araos, 309. Theatre, 86, 354. 

Orthostatai, 67, 170. 


Paestum. Basilica or Enneastylos, 70, 
73, 89-91,°194, 214, 303, 309, 313. 
Temple of Demeter, 50, 81, 89-91, 
105, 114, 184-185, 194, 209, 232, 263, 
268. Temple of Poseidon, 58, 70, 96, 
102-103, 116, 124-125, 183, 1389, 141- 
142, 191, 304. 

Painting, 147-149. 

Paionios, 62. 

Palace, 63, 355-356. 

Palaimon, 306. 

Palaiopolis, 111. 

Palaistra, 325-326, 334. 

Palatitza, 94. 

Palisade, 294. 

Palmette and lotus, 160-161, 197-198, 
224, 227, 240. 

Palmyra, 287. 

Panels, 45, 176-177, 232-233. 

Paralogeia, 354. 


as: 


GENERAL INDEX 


Parapet, 331. 

Paraskenia, 352. 

Parastades, 43, 69, 309. 

Parion, 300. 

Paris, 259. 

Parodoi, 315, 346. 

Parthenon: see Athens. 

Pausanias, 8, 319, 323, 370. 

Pavements, 19, 41, 166-167, 246-249. 

Peiraieus. Town, 286. Water supply, 
296. Colonnades, 318, 368. Mixed 
styles, 284. Arsenal, 8, 55-56, 130, 
183, 249. 

Peisistratos, 286-287, 335. 

Peligriniatza, 296. 

Pennethorne, 141. 

Penrose, 89, 97, 137, 201, 236, 252. 

Pentastyle, 312-313. 

Pentekontoros, 365. 

Pergamon. Walls, 66. Altar, 166, 204, 
219, 300. Temple of Athena, 58, 227. 
Temple of Dionysos, 85, 98, 105, 131, 
133, 134, 225, 232, 265. Ionic Temple, 
158, 204, 220, 240, 271. Trajan’s 
Temple, 158, 240. Gymnasium, 98, 
119. Library, 335-336. Stoa, 48, 55, 
86, 98, 185-186, 211, 227, 269, 284, 
322. Propylon, 163, 178-179. Tomb 
of Telephos, 120. 

Peribolos, 323. 

Peridromos, 292. 

Perilogeion, 354. 

Peristyle, 248, 300, 310, 356, 360. 

Perrot, 127. 

Perseus, 221-222. 

Persia, 9. 

Persian, 199. 

Persians, 195. 

Phaistos, 90, 159, 166, 269, 295, 356. 

Pharos, 367. 

Phigaleia. Gateway, 78. Temple of 
Apollo: its columns, 82, 85, 88, 90, 
94; 97, 131, 158, 184, 191, 197, 260; 
frieze, 270; ceiling and roof, 117-118, 
275, 313; mixed styles, 283. Tower 
291. 

Philander, 257. 

Philippeion: see Olympia. 

Philippian colonnade, 322. 


421 


Philon of Byzantium, 250, 290-292, 
294. 

Philon of Eleusis, 368. 

Philopappos: see Athens. 


| Philoxenos, 297. 


Phoenicians, 195. 

Phoenician ships, 365. 

Phokikon, 316. 

Phrygia, 2. 

Phrygian tombs, 371. 

Physical culture, 324-334. 

Piers, 11, 79, 250, 254, 257. 

Pilasters, 69-76, 177-181, 251-253. 

Piles, 3, 6. 

Pillars, 79, 191-192. 

Pinakes, 7, 118, 352. 

Pinakotheke, 171, 176. 

Pine, 3. 

Pipes, 296, 328. 

Plane, 4. 

Planks, 5. 

Platband, 140, 171, 172. 

Plate, 6, 7, 172. 

Plateia, 187, 301. 

Plinth, 67, 71, 80, 84-85, 135. 

Pliny, 2, 7. 

Plumb line, 4. 

Podium, 58-61. 

Pollio, 336. 

Pollux, 116. 

Polygnotos, 173, 301, 336. 

Polykleitos the elder, 61. 

Polykleitos the younger, 158, 307. 

Polykrates, 335. 

Polytriglyphal, 269. 

Pompeii. Walls, 66. Gate, 294. 
Forum, 186. Curia, 316. Bath, 328. 
Houses, 168, 356, 359, 360. Theatre, 
354. Greek Temple, 57, 80-81, 312. 
Isis Temple, 101-102. Columns, 94, 
184, 188, 190. Wall paintings, 173. 

Poplar, 3. 

Porch, 264, 301, 308-312, 358. 

Poros, 21-22. 

Porticoes, 248, 336, 354-357. 

Poseidon, Temple of: see Paestum, 
Sounion. 

Poseidon Hippios, 6. 

Postern, 290. 


422 


Posts, 5, i. 

Pozzuoli, 220. 

Priene. Streets of, 287. Agora, 202, 
237, 249, 319, 321-322. Temple of 
Athena: its platform, 166, 249; col- 
umns, 74, 84, 133, 135, 181, 204, 216, 
251, 260-261; entablature, 52, 106- 
107, 137, 1389, 218, 220, 231, 249; ceil- 
ing and roof, 53, 118, 236-237, 245, 
276; propylon, 52, 86, 111, 295. <As- 
klepieion, 52,139. Baths, 328. Foun- 
tain, 297. Gymnasium, 325. Houses, 
129, 184, 356-360.  Palaistra, 325. 

“Bouleuterion, 315-316. Prytaneion, 
317-318. Stadion, 331-332. Theatre, 
190, 344, 346, 350, 353-354. 

Prodomos, 300-301. 

Pronaos, 300-301. 

Property-rooms, 346. 

Proportion, major ratios, 126-130; 
minor ratios, 130-140; modified 
ratios, 140-141; symmetrical ratios, 
141-145. 

Propylaia, 294-295 : see Athens, Priene. 

Proskenion, 352. 

Prostas, 358, 360. 

Prostyle, 309. 

Prytaneion, 317, 318. 

Pseudoperipteral, 311. 

Ptolemaic, 211. 

Ptolemy Philadelphos, 334, 365. 

Ptolemy Philopator, 173, 237, 365. 

Puchstein, 126, 132, 201, 250. 

Pulvinus, 94-95, 203-204. 

Purlins, 11. 

Pydna, 372. 

Pyknostyle, 132, 133. 

Pythios, 276. 


Quadriga, 240. 
Quarry, 24. 


Rafters, 3, 6, 11. 

Rails, 45. 

Ram, 364. 

Ramp, 308. 

Ratios, major, 126-130; minor, 130- 
140 ; modified, 140-141 ; symmetrical, 
141-145. ; 


GENERAL INDEX 


Red, 218, 232, 234. 

Reel, 150, 220, 222. 

Reglets, 9-10, 104. 

Regulae, 104-105, 218. 

Renaissance, 240, 280. 

Reservoirs, 296. 

Restaurants, 324. 

Revetments, 18-19, 168, 173. 

Rhamnous, 106, 266, 300-301, 309. 

Rhodes, 367. 

Rhodian, 356. 

Ridge beam, 11. 

Robing rooms, 346. 

Roman, arcades 255; baths, 327-328; 
columns, 184, 194-195, 283; entab- 
latures,. 218-219, 226-227, 231; 
ceilings, 237, 245; pilasters, 250; 
windows, 253; ornament, 153, 158, 
168; houses, 356, 361; library, 336; 
ships, 364, 365; theatres, 346, 349, 
352-353. 

Rome. Ara Pacis, 158. Arch of Septi- 
mius Severus, 218. Baths, 111, 329. 
Column of Trajan, 163. Temple of 
Castor and Pollux, 116. Concord, 
117. Fortuna Virilis, 311. Jupiter 
Capitolinus, 280. Jupiter Stator, 


217-218. Liberty, 336. Mars Ultor, 


172. Sun, 158, 219. Minerva, 217. 
S. Maria in Trastevere, 200-201. 
Pantheon, 259. Mausoleia of Au- 
gustus and Hadrian, 370. Theatre, 
B02. 

Roof, construction of, 11-12, 18, 53-54; 
forms of, 117-125, 307; decoration 
of, 234-245; composition of, 274- 
280. Temples classified by, 318. 
Stoa roof, 322. 

Rosette, 159-160, 224, 227, 241. 

Rubble, 7. 


Sacred ways, 287-289. 

Sagalassos, 348, 350-352. 

Salonica, 111. 

Samos. Temple of Hera, 83, 96, 181, 
206. Towers, 291. Water supply, 
296. : 

Samothrace, 78, 120, 200. 

Saw, 4. 


ir a ip Beek t 


a I es Sl ae a 


GENERAL INDEX 


Seales, 163. 

Schools, 334-335, 

Schultz, 142. 

Segesta, 116, 134, 183. 

Seleukeia, 367-368. 

Selinous. Temple C: its plan, 302-303, 
312; pavement, 246-248; columns, 
91, 133, 134, 207, 258; entablature, 
104, 105, 110, 113, 138, 222, 225, 263, 
271-273; ceiling and roof, 161, 273, 
275. Temple D: its plan, 302-303, 
312; pavement, 246, 248; antae, 70; 
columns, 91, 133, 190, 207-208 ; entab- 
lature, 263; krepidoma, 57; gable, 
139. Temple E, 262. Temple F, 48, 
139, 147, 161-162, 243, 302-303. Tem- 
ple G, 74, 304-305. Temple of 
Empedocles, 309. 

Sepulchral architecture, 368-375. 

Shaft, 46, 85-90, 135-136, 183. 

Shanks, 225. 

Shields, 217, 224, 237. 

Ships, 361-366. 

Sicily, 12, 126, 131, 217. 

Sidewalks, 287. 

Sidon, 372-373. 

Sikyon, 305, 339, 354, 370. 

Sikyonian, 370. 

Sills, 7. 

Sima, 52, 122-124, 140, 241-245, 276- 
279. 

Skene, 346-354. 

Smintheion, 82. 231. 

Smyrna, 369-370. 

Socle, 42, 56, 67, 165. 

Soffit, 107, 115, 219, 221, 231-233, 236. 

Solunto, 186. 

Sounion. Temple of Poseidon, 74, 106, 
178, 185, 270. Temple of Athena, 
310. 

Sparta, 290, 306-307. 

Spatula, 147. 

Spina, 333. 

Spiral, 94, 195-202, 211. 

Splicing, 5. 

Spouts, 123, 245. 

Springs, 295. 

Square, 4, 286, 291, 319, 325. 

Stabian, 328. 


423 


Stadion, 330-332. 

Stairways, 8, 341-343, 346. 

Stems, 161. 

Stereobate, 40, 246-247. 

Stiles, 45. 

Stoa, 257, 321-323. 

Stone construction, 21-38. 

Storehouses, 318, 368. 

Strabo, 334. 

Strategeion, 318. 

Stratos, 56. 

Streets, 286-289. 

Stretchers, 15. 

Stromatobate, 61. 

Stroteres, 117-118. 

Stucco, 20-21. 

Studs, 7. 

Style, 280-284. 

Stylobate, 40, 127, 246-247. 

Submarine, 367. 

Supports, 85, 92. 

Suwéda, 217. 

Syracuse, 176, 185, 271, 274, 291, 300, 
346. 

Syria, 111, 217. 

Systyle, 132. 


Taenia, 104, 218. 

Taker of cities, 292. 

Tamossos, 371-372. 

Technologie, 2. 

Tegea, 74, 185, 283. 

Telamones, 86, 193. 

Telephos, 120. 

Temenos, 315-314. 

Temples, 300-314; of Aphaia, see Ae- 
gina; of Apollo, see Corinth, De- 
los, Delphi, Metapontum, Miletos, 
Neandreia, Phigaleia, Troad; of 
Asklepios, see Epidauros, Priene; of 
Artemis, see Ephesos, Magnesia; 
of Athena, see Athens, Pergamon, 
Priene, Sounion; of Castor and Pol- 
lux, see Rome; of Concord, see 
Rome; of Concordia, see Akragas; 
of Demeter, see Eleusis, Gaggera, 
Paestum; of Despoina, see Lyko- 
soura; of Dionysos, see Lesbos, 
Pergamon; of Empedocles, see 


424 


Selinous; Enneastylos, see Paestum ; 
the Erechtheion, see Athens; of 
Hera, see Argos, Olympia, Samos; 
of Herakles, see Cori; of Mars, see 
Rome; the Olympieion, see Akra- 
gas, Athens; Parthenon see Athens; 
of Poseidon, see Paestum, Sounion ; 
of Theseus, see Athens; of Zeus, 
see Akragas, Athens, Aizanoi, La- 
branda, Nemea, Olympia; for other 
temples, see the name of town where 
located. 

Tenon, 6. 

Tenos, 291. 

Teos, 82, 198, 248, 334. 

Termessos, 316, 348, 350, 354. 

Terra-cotta, 17-19, 233, 296. 

Tesselatum, 41. 

Tetraglyph, 109. 

Tetrastyle, 312, 356. 

Texier, 323. 

Thalamegos, 172-173, 188-189, 237. 

Thalamoi, 302, 359. 

Thasos, 170. 

Theagenes, 297. 

Theatre, orchestra, 337-339; theatron, 
389-346 ; skene, 346-354; see Argos, 
Aspendos, Athens, Delos, Epidauros, 
Eretria, Magnesia, Megalopolis, 
Miletos, Orange, Oropos, Pompeii, 
Priene, Rome, Sagalassos, Segesta, 
Sikyon, Syracuse, Termessos. 

Theatron, 339-346, 

Thebes, 291. 

Theophrastos, 2, 3, 7. 

Thera, 356. 

Thermon, 221, 225, 303. 

Theron, 61, 269, 284. 

“Theseion: see Athens. 

Theseus, 224. 

Thesmotheteion, 318. 

Thessalonica, 192, 226. 

Tholoi, 87, 119-120, 371: see Mycenae. 

Tholos: see Athens, Epidauros, My- 
cenae. 

Thorikos, 313, 338-339. 

Thouria, 296-297. 

Thrasyllos, 79, 86, 191, 266. 

Thresholds, 3. 


GENERAL INDEX 


Thronoi, 344. 

Tiles, 17-18, 121-122, 240. 

Tiryns. Town and walls, 119, 285, 289, 
295. Palace, 8, 87, 149, 166, 173, 225, 
227, 355-356, 359. 

Toichobates, 56. 

Tombs, 368-375: see Aegina, Akragas, 
Athens, Halikarnassos, Kenchreae, 
Knidos, Knossos, Labranda, Lycia, 
Marathon, Mycenae, Mylasa, Myra, 
Pergamon, Rome, Sikyou, Smyrna, 
Tamossos, Xanthos. 

Tools, 4-5, 24-26. 

Towers, 111, 289-292. 

Towns, 285-297. 

Trabes compactiles, 8. 

Trajan, 118, 163, 240. 

Treasuries: see Delphi, Olympia. 

Triglyphs, 10; construction of, 50-51; 
forms of, 109-110; proportions of, 
138; decoration of, 225-226; compo- 
sition of, 266-269, 272, 280. 

Tripods, 224. 

Trireme, 365. 

Tritons, 237. 

Troad, 57, 200, 369. 

Troizen, 86. 

Trophonios, 6. 

Troy, 8, 168, 285-286, 289. 

Trunnels: see Mutules, Regulae. 

Trussed, 12. 

Tumulus, 369. 

Tunis, 7. 

Turkey, 297. 

Tuscan, 195, 280. 

Tympanon, 124, 237, 273-274. 

Typhon, 237. 


University, 334. 
Ursinianus, 332. 


Vase paintings, 2, 283, 327. 

Vases, 240. 

Vaults, 32-33, 119-120, 371-372. 
Venetian, 366. 

Viae, 232. 

Virgil, 142. ; 

Vitium lacunariorum, 275. 

Vitruvius, 2, 6; on towns and walls, 


be 
oi 
ee 


GENERAL INDEX 


250, 286, 291-292; pavements and 
floors, 19-20; doors and gates, 77-78, 
130, 141, 174, 254, 293 ; columns, 88, 92, 
132, 135, 141, 184, 192, 201, 255, 258, 
260; entablatures, 8, 138-139, 255- 
256, 279; ceilings and roofs, 20, 120, 
274; proportion, 126-145; basilicas, 
128-129; temples, 127-128, 307-308, 
314; houses, 129, 356, 359; theatres, 
129, 343, 348-349; the palaistra, 325. 


‘Wall plates, 6, 7, 172. 

Walls, of wood, 7; of brick, 13-16; 
with stucco covering, 19-21; of 
stone, 41-43; forms of, 62-69; pro- 
portions, 130; decoration of, 167- 
173, 189; composition of, 249-251; 
city walls, 289-292; submarine, 367. 

‘Walnut, 3. 


425 


Water spouts, 123, 241, 245. 

Water supply, 295-297. 

Wells, 297. 

Wild fig, 3. 

Windows, 6, 41-46, 78-79, 173-176, 253- 
254, 313. 

Winds, Tower of: see Athens. 

Withes, 5. 

Wood, 1-12, 87. 

Wrestling, 325. 


Xanthos, 199, 372. 


Zeus, Altar of: see Akragas, Perga- 
mon. Temple of: see Akragas, 
Athens, Aizanoi, Labranda, Nemea, 
Olympia. 

Zoomorphic, 163. 

Zophoros, 108, 114. 


a ae ts 
i x iY 
4 , C4 
Le ak i “i A ‘4 

‘ se | “ 

A ol 
4 
4 
- . 

<4 

4 
™ 
. - 
* 

i 
\ 


HANDBOOKS OF 


Archeology and Antiquities 


Edited by 
PERCY GARDNER anv F. W. KELSEY 


FOWLER 
The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic. By W. WarpE 
FOWLER. $1.25 wert 
FROTHINGHAM 
The Monuments of Christian Rome. From Constantine to the Renais- 
sance. By ARTHUR L. FROTHINGHAM, Ph.D. $2.25 net 


GARDNER, E. A. 


Greek Sculpture. By Ernest A. GARDNER. ‘Two parts in one volume, 


with Appendix. $2.50 wet 

Appendix to the above, separately. $0.35 met 
GARDNER, P. 

Grammar of Greek Art. By Percy GARDNER. $1.75 net 
GREENIDGE 

A Handbook of Greek Constitutional History. By A. H. J. GREENIDGE. 

With Map... $1.25 ze 

Roman Public Life. By A. H. J. GREENIDGE. $2.50 net 
HILL 

Greek and Roman Coins. By GeorGe F. HIL1, of the Coins Depart- 

ment, British Museum. $2.25 ner 
LANCIANI 

The Destruction of Ancient Rome. A sketch of the history of the 

monuments. By RopoLro LANCIANI. $1.50 ef 
LOWRIE 

Monuments of the Early Church. By W. Lowrik. $1.25 net 
MARQUAND 

Greek Architecture. By ALLAN MARQUAND. $2.25 vet 


PUBLISHED BY 


THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 


Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York 


Festivals of the Period of the Renee crc. 


Social Lite at Rome 
in the Age of Cicero 


Cloth, Svo, $2.25 net, by mail | rece 


The age of Cicero is a critical moment in the history not only 
Rome but of the world. The great political question of the time 
this: Was the Roman Republican constitution capable of governi 
the Empire — of holding it together, and developing it on sound a 
just principles? Scholars are beginning to feel that if they are 
understand rightly either the problem or its solution, they must exe 
ine more carefully the living fibre and tissue of society in this age. ig : 


By. GEORGE W. BOTSFORD 


Professor of Greek and Roman History at Columbia University; a . u 
of “A History of Rome,” etc. ' ; 


The Roman Assemblies 


comparative politics or sociology. Neve problems pe 1 
clearer light than heretofore, and the volume will prove the most 
ful and judicious treatment of the subject available to students. 
living, first-hand study of popular government, it will attract not o1 
classical scholars, but also those who are concerned with such proble 
as are raised by the interests of the United States in the Philippi 


PUBLISHED BY 


THE MACMILLAN COMPANY Hi 


Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New os ork — ‘ 


* 


Proressor THOMAS D. SEYMOUR’S Great Work 


Life in the Homeric Age 


Decorated cloth, gilt top, 720 pages, 8vo, with maps 
and illustrations, $4.00 net; by mail, $4.28 


Derived from a careful, first-hand study of the “Iliad” and the “ Odyssey,” 
and accompanied by a wealth of bibliography for the study of Homeric an- 
tiquity, the point of view has been philological, not archeological. ‘ From 
the poet’s language,” the author says, “he has attempted to discover what was 
before the poet’s mind. . . . Homer’s picture of the life of his age is of par- 
ticular interest to the modern reader since it is the earliest account extant of 
the culture from which our own is a true lineal descendant.” Such a volume, 
in addition to its manifest importance in the class room, forms an invaluable 
work of reference for the general library, increased by the numerous maps 
and illustrations. 

“ Absolutely free from speculation and controversy, the volume will surely 
prove valuable to every student of Greek life and literature. It has the further 
advantage of being the only work of its kind on the English book market to- 
day.” — 7ribune (New York). 


Proressorn MARTIN L. D’OOGE’S Great Work 


The Acropolis of Athens 


Decorated cloth, gilt top, illustrated, $4.00 net; by mail, $4.28 


This handsome book embodies the results of a number of years of study and 
of repeated visits to Athens, where in 1886-87 the author was director of the 
American School of Classical Studies. While some of the older problems 
connected with the history of the Acropolis have been solved by the aid of 
the discoveries completed in 1889, others have been raised which await further 
light. A final satisfactory history of the Acropolis and its monuments may 
never be written, but this work gives a summary of the most important contri- 
butions to its history and states the results of the author’s study of the site and 
of the ruins upon it. It is designed both for readers who have a general in- 
terest in Greek history and Greek art and for students and visitors at Athens 
who desire to use a handbook upon the spot. The history of the Acropolis is 
traced from the time of its earliest occupation down to the present, and the 
volume is handsomely illustrated. 


PUBLISHED BY 


THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 


Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York 


By Dr. CHARLES WALDSTEIN _ 
anp LEONARD SHOOBRIDGE 


- 


Herculaneum, 
Past, Present, and Future 


The most important cu that has ever been written on Herculaneum; iN 
gives not only the history of all excavations made, with descriptions of 
objects recovered, but presents the authoritative conclusions of Dr. Waldstei 
full experience as to plan which should be followed in further excavations, 


- 


By. J.B. . BURY, Urry. DG Lea 


Regius Professor of Modern History in the University of Cambridge. Pus 


The Ancient Greek Historians 


A most interesting series of lectures delivered at Harvard University on the 
Lane foundation. The author shows the first development and the growt 
of the Hellenic conception of history as not merely a story-book, in whic 
myth and facts are mingled, but as having a value for life.» He places thi 
' view which arose with Thucydides beside the announcement in 1824 by 

Ranke that the historian’s task is not to teach lessons or pass JURR ea bu 
cele to investigate how events happened. 


Cloth, 8vo, library gilt, $2.25 net; by mail, % 
Bys. Hs BUTCHER ek) 


Sometime Professor of Greek in the University of Edinhures 


Harvard Lectures on Greek Subjects | 
Cloth, 8vo, $2.25 net; by mail, $2. 


Some Aspects of the Greek Genius 
~ Cloth, 8vo, $2.25 net; by mail, 


PUBLISHED BY 


THE MACMILEAN COMPANY ~ 


Sixty-four and Sixty-six Fifth Avenue, New York % 


= 


Se ee ge a i. ai an a ee 


we ee ee a 
lle » alti ee x 


IHN 


GETTY CENTER LIBRARY 


IU 


| 
25 00001 1052 


1 


33 


en 
——S 
SoS 
—SS= 
— = 
———— 


am -9 9 ioe. 
he pe 


